Anyone seen the 1080p panasonic plasmas?

[FastRedPonyCar]

My attention (due to size restraints) has shifted from the 50" DLP Samsungs to these 42" Plasmas by panasonic. Specifically, the TH-42PZ77U model.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp;jsessionid=IT1FZUZUISBSBKC4D3FVAGQ?sku Id=8501757&productCategoryId=abcat0101001&type=product&tab=1&id=1186004963573

Seems like a great TV. We didn't look at it when we were at best buy this weekend so I haven't seen it in person. The anti glare coating along with it's superior image quality vs lcd has me intrigued and it falls within our $1500 or less budget.

[Lyme]

I'm curious what your going to use it for? Regular tv watching? Do you like watching a lot of football? Playing video games (sports in particular)?

[FastRedPonyCar]

regular tv and movies. football on sundays occasionally but that's really it.

[lduguay]

This one has a better PQ, but for 200$ more

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8365841&st=TH-42PZ700U&lp=1&type=product&cp=1&id=1177718059598

[FastRedPonyCar]

It's only $1430 from amazon and the 42PZ77U is $1391.

What's the difference between the 2?

I notice just at first glance that the cheaper one has a 10,000:1 contrast ratio and the more expensive one has 5000:1

Isn't higher better?

[Rakeesh]

This one has a better PQ, but for 200$ more

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8365841&st=TH-42PZ700U&lp=1&type=product&cp=1&id=1177718059598

That one is worse.

[Lyme]

regular tv and movies. football on sundays occasionally but that's really it.

The reasoning was because Plasma tvs still have issues with burn in (there is a thread on that around here somewhere), but as your not typically watching programs that cause the issues, it shoulden't be a problem.

[FastRedPonyCar]

This one MAY be in our price range. It's the most expensive of the 3 types of their 42" plasmas. Any word on it?

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8365841&st=42PZ700&lp=1&type=product&cp=1&id=1177718059598

[Rakeesh]

This one MAY be in our price range. It's the most expensive of the 3 types of their 42" plasmas. Any word on it?

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8365841&st=42PZ700&lp=1&type=product&cp=1&id=1177718059598

The one in your first post looks the best so far. I haven't taken the time to look for the response times though. Usually I don't heed that spec. To me, anything below 10ms is good, and pretty much all TV's fall well below that these days.

[FastRedPonyCar]

the main difference between them is that hte first one i listed has a 10000:1 contrast and the other 2 have 5000:1

[lduguay]

That one is worse.
Care to share?
I've seen both side by side and i prefer the PQ of the 700u.
The 700u has an anti-reflective screen, and the pz77u has an anti-glare coating (LCD like).
So anti-glare works better in bright rooms, anti-reflective is better for dark rooms.
Everybody knows that the contrast ratio rating is baloney.
The 700u has 4 speakers.. (Not really a deciding factor, as i usually leave them unpacked in the original box).

[lduguay]

The one in your first post looks the best so far. I haven't taken the time to look for the response times though. Usually I don't heed that spec. To me, anything below 10ms is good, and pretty much all TV's fall well below that these days.
Response time for a plasma screen? :headexplode:

[FastRedPonyCar]

yeah see I won't be gaming any/if at all on the TV so it's not a huge deal.

[lduguay]

The reasoning was because Plasma tvs still have issues with burn in (there is a thread on that around here somewhere), but as your not typically watching programs that cause the issues, it shoulden't be a problem.
True to a certain degree, but they all have built-in pixel orbiters now, that reduces the burn-in considerably. Unless you really want to play "pong" at the brightest setting for days, then buy a LCD.

[newfiejudd]

There was a good article in a recent magazine that actually test a crap load of TV at True 1080i settings. I was shocke dby how many failed and how so few passed.

Most of these new TV's say 1080 on them but that is only for Still pictures. Do some research. Only a handfull in each brand passed. I believe the Sony had the most. Happy shopping.

[Rakeesh]

Care to share?
I've seen both side by side and i prefer the PQ of the 700u.
The 700u has an anti-reflective screen, and the pz77u has an anti-glare coating (LCD like).
So anti-glare works better in bright rooms, anti-reflective is better for dark rooms.
Everybody knows that the contrast ratio rating is baloney.

No, contrast ratio is going to have a HUGE impact on the picture. It is a ratio of the difference between the darkest darks and the brightest brights.

So anti-glare works better in bright rooms, anti-reflective is better for dark rooms.

I think that is the other way around. Anti-glare screens are going to be sharper because they use a glossy screen, but they don't stop all glare, they just make it much darker, and it can still be an annoyance if you have any lights on. Anti-reflective on the other hand eliminates all glare in any lighting, however since the screen isn't flat (on the microscopic level) like an anti-glare screen, there is slightly more optical diffraction, resulting in a picture that isn't as sharp.

You can't really say one is better than the other, as each has its trade off.

[Rakeesh]

There was a good article in a recent magazine that actually test a crap load of TV at True 1080i settings. I was shocke dby how many failed and how so few passed.

I think you mean true 1080p, and yeah there are a ton of TV's that fail this. Ironically, pretty much all of the TV's made by the little known brand westinghouse can pass a true 1080p picture. There are a few sharps that can as well.

[newfiejudd]

yeah that is the article. True 1080P, they even tried some TV's at 1080i. Yeah I was surprised with the westinghouse. I was also suprised with the Sharp. But it seemed alot of the sony's passed? even some of the cheaper sony models. Heck I even seen one of the models that passed on sale at Walmart last week. LOL. Hopefully HD becomes more prominent. I love HD shows. The picture and sound is amazing. I tend to avoid the standard def stations now. And hockey has never looked so good.

[Rakeesh]

yeah that is the article. True 1080P, they even tried some TV's at 1080i. Yeah I was surprised with the westinghouse. I was also suprised with the Sharp. But it seemed alot of the sony's passed? even some of the cheaper sony models. Heck I even seen one of the models that passed on sale at Walmart last week. LOL. Hopefully HD becomes more prominent. I love HD shows. The picture and sound is amazing. I tend to avoid the standard def stations now. And hockey has never looked so good.

I haven't read that particular article, but that had to have been the recent Sony models though. I used to be trying to find TV's like this a year and a half ago and it was impossible to find any, except for the westinghouse TV's. There was one JVC that did this, but you had to remove a little adapter it had that allowed for multiple inputs, essentially reducing the TV to only one input.

I think somebody actually started a class action lawsuit over this, because manufacturers were advertising 1080p but you could only send a 1080i signal to it, and it would do a bob deinterlace which essentially gives you a 1920x540 picture.

[newfiejudd]

Wow that's interesting. I didn't hear about that. But I can see why. You spend alot of cash on a 1080 tv and realize most time you get 1366X768 lol.. Yet it clearly states on the item, 1080. lol..

[betterdan]

As far as I have read there is no standard for measuring contrast ratios so in essence the specs listed for many tvs are very misleading.
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/spec-wars/contrast-ratio-shoot+out-everyone-loses-259495.php

[Rakeesh]

As far as I have read there is no standard for measuring contrast ratios so in essence the specs listed for many tvs are very misleading.
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/spec-wars/contrast-ratio-shoot+out-everyone-loses-259495.php

And this is true, however when you are dealing with the same brand, usually they are measured the same. Not always, but most of the time. Thus in this situation, it definitely applies here.

This is why before I buy a TV, I will look for a detailed review from a third party. Often times these reviews will include somebody doing actual measurements of response time, contrast ratio, etc.

[betterdan]

Yes I agree reviews are the best things to check into when looking to purchase items such as these.

[FastRedPonyCar]

hmmm... I wonder if the panasonics fall into this misrepresentation.

Anyways, I talked to my dad last night and he told me HHgreg is running a 20% off sale and no interest for like 3 years. It looks like we'll have a bit more money to spend on the TV from the no interest so I'm thinking of stepping up the size to around 46" and $1600~1700 price.

What are some highly rated 46 inchers in that price range?

[lduguay]

No, contrast ratio is going to have a HUGE impact on the picture. It is a ratio of the difference between the darkest darks and the brightest brights.



I think that is the other way around. Anti-glare screens are going to be sharper because they use a glossy screen, but they don't stop all glare, they just make it much darker, and it can still be an annoyance if you have any lights on. Anti-reflective on the other hand eliminates all glare in any lighting, however since the screen isn't flat (on the microscopic level) like an anti-glare screen, there is slightly more optical diffraction, resulting in a picture that isn't as sharp.

You can't really say one is better than the other, as each has its trade off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-reflective_coating

Anti-reflective or antireflection (AR) coatings are a type of optical coating applied to the surface of lenses and other optical devices to reduce reflection. This improves the efficiency of the system since less light is lost