Oppo launches $279 BD80 blu-ray player

[maniac_2004]

Any suggestions on whether its safe to put it in between clothes in check-in bags or there are other ways to get it?

if im not wrong you can import upto 25k .. so bdp 83 shud come in thru (legally)without an hassle...

 

[gobble]

Anchor Bay makes a huge difference, but even more is how its implemented. For example, the higher end Denon AVR's also use the same chip but give much lesser options in upscaling than what Oppo gives to scale accurately to different screen sizes and different sources (PAL/NTSC DVD's).

Again all this makes a difference depending upon size of screens and the viewing distance.

Any ideas or hints on how will the mediatek chip restrict my 480p upscaling options as compared to Anchorbay?

TIA
Regards

 

[venkatcr]

Any ideas or hints on how will the mediatek chip restrict my 480p upscaling options as compared to Anchorbay?

I don't understand. Why should Mediatek or any engine restrict up-scaling options? Can you elaborate your question?

Cheers

 

[spirovious]

Any ideas or hints on how will the mediatek chip restrict my 480p upscaling options as compared to Anchorbay?

TIA
Regards

Mediatek in Pioneer, Philips can go upto 1080p, any other prob?

 

[just4kix]

I brought my Sony BDP-S360 in my checked in baggage. No problems. The customs asked me what was inside. When I told them, they did not even bother and waved me off.

 

[spirovious]

I brought my Sony BDP-S360 in my checked in baggage. No problems. The customs asked me what was inside. When I told them, they did not even bother and waved me off.

Mumbai Airport?

 

[just4kix]

Yes. Mumbai airport.

 

[gobble]

I don't understand. Why should Mediatek or any engine restrict up-scaling options? Can you elaborate your question?

Cheers

In the BD-80 review the following was said

1. ... the BDP-80 offers a significant amount of the BDP-83's performance for about 60% of the price

2. ..., I'd recommend using the BDP-80's source direct mode and letting that (AVR) component handle the deinterlacing and scaling.

3 ...The benefits of the ABT2010 are going to be most apparent when watching lower-resolution video sources such as DVD


Now they are comparing it to a better AV engine but still .. has anyone observed what exactly is the noticeable deficiency when using the BD-80 to upscale SD video?


Edit: PS: and this one from the other review:

4 ...the BDP-80 has a proprietary processor which will most certainly provide significantly reduced video performance. Will this matter for Blu-ray and SACD/DVD-A playback? Not really (if at all) but it will affect how good DVDs will look on your big screen"


I'm just nit-picking here ... but curious all the same.

Regards

 

[psychotropic]

hey gobble, the Opo 980 was probably the best implementation of the mediatek chipset there has been, and the BD80 carries forward that design. Yes it's not as good as the ABT VRS, but it's kick the ass of pretty much any other upscaling DVD player. How it compares for instance to the Samsung BDP2500 which had the HQV Reon processor is what I was interested to know, but the reviews on avsforum seem to suggest that there are really no equals to the BD-80 all things considered (apart from the BD83).

Again, i think Oppo's recommendations with regard to the 980 and 983 are useful indicators. For 42" or below, the 980 will be sufficient. If you're going bigger, then get the 983.....similar for the BD-80 and the BD-83.

I am definitely going to pick up one when my aunt comes down from the US in July.

In the BD-80 review the following was said

1. ... the BDP-80 offers a significant amount of the BDP-83's performance for about 60% of the price

2. ..., I'd recommend using the BDP-80's source direct mode and letting that (AVR) component handle the deinterlacing and scaling.

3 ...The benefits of the ABT2010 are going to be most apparent when watching lower-resolution video sources such as DVD


Now they are comparing it to a better AV engine but still .. has anyone observed what exactly is the noticeable deficiency when using the BD-80 to upscale SD video?


Edit: PS: and this one from the other review:

4 ...the BDP-80 has a proprietary processor which will most certainly provide significantly reduced video performance. Will this matter for Blu-ray and SACD/DVD-A playback? Not really (if at all) but it will affect how good DVDs will look on your big screen"


I'm just nit-picking here ... but curious all the same.

Regards

 

[gobble]

hey gobble, the Opo 980 was probably the best implementation of the mediatek chipset there has been, and the BD80 carries forward that design. Yes it's not as good as the ABT VRS, but it's kick the ass of pretty much any other upscaling DVD player. How it compares for instance to the Samsung BDP2500 which had the HQV Reon processor is what I was interested to know, but the reviews on avsforum seem to suggest that there are really no equals to the BD-80 all things considered (apart from the BD83).

Again, i think Oppo's recommendations with regard to the 980 and 983 are useful indicators. For 42" or below, the 980 will be sufficient. If you're going bigger, then get the 983.....similar for the BD-80 and the BD-83.

I am definitely going to pick up one when my aunt comes down from the US in July.

OK OK I am buying then ... :licklips:

PS: you make a good salesman :clapping:

My nitpicking is only due to extra $$ I have to pay over 980H and the fact that I break my commitment to DRM free movement of FOSS.

Hence I was searching for for someone to gently tap me over the edge ...

Thanks Psycho and Venkat , I pronounce you two guilty for compelling me into renegading on these (FOSS) values hyeah:


Cheers

 

[venkatcr]

Thanks Psycho and Venkat , I pronounce you two guilty for compelling me into renegading on these (FOSS) values hyeah:

Guilty as charged and you are welcome. Though I would say Psycho is more guilty.

Cheers

 

[sud98]

Gobble and Psychotropic,, so which one, the 80 or the 83?

I am more inclined to the 83 for the following reasons, do correct me if my thinking is incorrect.

1. The 83 has a dedicated stereo circuitry so the audio quality would be better than the 80. As I am not planning for a dedicated CDP, this is +1 for the 83. Although gobble you did point that a budget CDP like the Marantz would outshine the 83, my music listening is not too high.

2. The 83 would help in terms of long term protection esp. going the projection screens as also for a bigger TV (prob. a year or two down the line). Although currently, the 80 should be more than sufficient.

3. The 80 would mean I would need to upgrade my AVR to HDMI capable as my current AVR cannot. This I am not very sure, but it appears that via the HDMI cable the 80 will only pass through the signals and I will be dependent on the TV scaler esp. if I am watching BD. My TV is a HD ready and not full HD TV, so the 1080p signals would need to be downconverted to 720p. So may not be great viewing. Again, with my smaller TV size may not make a diff. But I am assuming the player lasts around 5-7 years, so I will upgrade the TV by then.

Please give your inputs.

 

[psychotropic]

if you can afford it i wold definitely say go for the 83. Like you said even if your current screen size doesn't justify it, when you upgrade to a larger TV or a projector it will definitely be useful. Also I am not very sure there are going to be many more technological advances in terms of de-interlacing and upscaling SD content.....since SD is slowly on its way out. ABT VRS might well be the last and final great technology for this. But then I could be dead wrong also

Gobble and Psychotropic,, so which one, the 80 or the 83?

I am more inclined to the 83 for the following reasons, do correct me if my thinking is incorrect.

1. The 83 has a dedicated stereo circuitry so the audio quality would be better than the 80. As I am not planning for a dedicated CDP, this is +1 for the 83. Although gobble you did point that a budget CDP like the Marantz would outshine the 83, my music listening is not too high.

2. The 83 would help in terms of long term protection esp. going the projection screens as also for a bigger TV (prob. a year or two down the line). Although currently, the 80 should be more than sufficient.

3. The 80 would mean I would need to upgrade my AVR to HDMI capable as my current AVR cannot. This I am not very sure, but it appears that via the HDMI cable the 80 will only pass through the signals and I will be dependent on the TV scaler esp. if I am watching BD. My TV is a HD ready and not full HD TV, so the 1080p signals would need to be downconverted to 720p. So may not be great viewing. Again, with my smaller TV size may not make a diff. But I am assuming the player lasts around 5-7 years, so I will upgrade the TV by then.

Please give your inputs.

 

[just4kix]

Gobble and Psychotropic,, so which one, the 80 or the 83?

I am more inclined to the 83 for the following reasons, do correct me if my thinking is incorrect.

1. The 83 has a dedicated stereo circuitry so the audio quality would be better than the 80. As I am not planning for a dedicated CDP, this is +1 for the 83. Although gobble you did point that a budget CDP like the Marantz would outshine the 83, my music listening is not too high.

2. The 83 would help in terms of long term protection esp. going the projection screens as also for a bigger TV (prob. a year or two down the line). Although currently, the 80 should be more than sufficient.

3. The 80 would mean I would need to upgrade my AVR to HDMI capable as my current AVR cannot. This I am not very sure, but it appears that via the HDMI cable the 80 will only pass through the signals and I will be dependent on the TV scaler esp. if I am watching BD. My TV is a HD ready and not full HD TV, so the 1080p signals would need to be downconverted to 720p. So may not be great viewing. Again, with my smaller TV size may not make a diff. But I am assuming the player lasts around 5-7 years, so I will upgrade the TV by then.

Please give your inputs.

If you are planning to play Blu-Ray titles in future and your AVR is not having HDMI-in, this means that you cannot listen to HD Audio (Dolby TrueHD or DTD HD Master Audio).

My suggestion is invest in the 80 model and use the money saved in upgrading your AVR. I recently upgraded my AVR precisely for the same reason.

 

[sud98]

I agree, but as a step in my upgrade chain, the source is first then speakers and then AVR and then display. So probably, will live with getting poorer sound till then.

 

[venkatcr]

If you are planning to play Blu-Ray titles in future and your AVR is not having HDMI-in, this means that you cannot listen to HD Audio (Dolby TrueHD or DTD HD Master Audio).

This is not entirely true. If the AVR can accept analogue signals, the BDP-80 can decode and output HD audio,

Cheers

 

[just4kix]

This is not entirely true. If the AVR can accept analogue signals, the BDP-80 can decode and output HD audio,

Cheers

Very true. But isn't decoding and amplification better left to the device that is more suitable for the purpose, i.e., AVR?

Also, there would be so many cables connecting the BDP to the AVR. Add more wires clutter. Will not a single HDMI cable be better in this case?

 

[just4kix]

I agree, but as a step in my upgrade chain, the source is first then speakers and then AVR and then display. So probably, will live with getting poorer sound till then.

My personal priority is slightly different. But that's OK.

 

[venkatcr]

Very true. But isn't decoding and amplification better left to the device that is more suitable for the purpose, i.e., AVR?

Given the highly acclaimed audio circuitry of the BD83, unless you have an AVR that is close to a lakh, I suspect the BD83 will wallop all AVRs in audio decoding. And so will the BD80 given the good results of the 983 which it mimics.

Also, there would be so many cables connecting the BDP to the AVR. Add more wires clutter. Will not a single HDMI cable be better in this case?

That is entirely an user option. If you want to save money and have a good audio option, a little bit of sweat is needed. And, once connected, all the wires will be hanging at the back.

Cheers

 

[sud98]

It would depend upon the device thats converting the signal. For a budget player, probably the AVR has the better decoders. For a mid to high end source, it might have the better decoders.

So, going to the earlier question that gobble had. With the BDP-80, you would probably go HDMI passsthru and let the AVR do the work. With the 83 and 83SE, you may want the player to handle the decoding and the AVR to be just amplifying the signals both for stereo as well as multi-channel audio.