|
|
Post by napabill on Jun 6, 2010 13:08:54 GMT -5
As I understand it, the primary difference between these two players is that the BDP-83 uses the Anchor Bay video processing chip, while the BDP-80 doesn't. In that the UMC-1 is touted to have it's own high-end video processing ability, shouldn't this make the BDP-80 a better, and less expensive, choice? Anything else to consider?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mischief on Jun 6, 2010 13:13:59 GMT -5
IMO and I think most will agree that the video chip in the 83 and 83SE are better than the UMC-1.
If you are using a projector you will definitely see a benefit with the 83, on a TV set it will depend on the size and viewing distance.
|
|
|
|
Post by napabill on Jun 6, 2010 13:34:52 GMT -5
58" Panasonic Plasma (1080p) viewed at about 12'
|
|
|
|
Post by Mischief on Jun 6, 2010 15:31:23 GMT -5
Go for the 83, you won't be sorry.
|
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator 
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,511
Member is Online
|
Post by LCSeminole on Jun 6, 2010 18:10:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by vitocorleone on Jun 16, 2010 12:01:59 GMT -5
Older thread so not sure if the OP made a decision, but, for blu-rays and using HDMI, there is no difference between the 80 and 83. If this is your setup, there is no reason at all to buy the 83.
The 83 has much better video upconverting for DVDs and analog audio output - video improvements due to the fully implemented Anchor Bay chip (the "fully implemented" is important because some AVR's, like Denon, have the same chip, but have only implemented a subset of its functions)/
The 80 has about equal video to the rest of the leaders in the market and one of the best analog out sections as well compared to other leaders in the market.
The 83 and 83SE are practically in a league of their own in the price range, with other makers trying to compete later this year.
|
|
