Panasonic Plasmas?

[mallen]

Hi,

Im new to the flat screen buying market and decided that im going to dip in and find out what its all about. We have an 8 year old Panasonic 32" CRT that is now rather long in the tooth. We need to free up some space in our lounge and I would like to have a flat screen hung on the wall. Our old CRT is enormous and very heavy (it cracked the first TV unit we had it on a few years ago!).

Anyway have some cash coming in the next couple of weeks. Wanted a screen that was maybe 42 or 46". Looked at most mfcrs. LCD and Plasma. The LCDs are poor even compared to our old CRT! One of the Panasonics 37" was ok-ish but we may aswell lose space and stick with our CRT.(Some of the LCDs were so poor in picture quality that I wondered why on earth people would buy one! One mfcr that used to make the best CRTS and broadcast equipment should be ashamed, go back and have a look at your trinitron tubes from 10 years ago!)

The plasmas are better. The Pioneer 42" is the winner defo the best piccy quality but pricey and also no longer available (Im not buying something that is already ceased manufacture). That leaves the Panasonic Plasmas, not as good as the Pioneer but...
Im considering the 42PZ85, 42PZ80, 46PZ85 or 46PZ80. Not sure which. Not sure if I can see the difference between the 80 and 85 range. Also noticed that some had fans in the back so am concerned about the longevity and noise etc.
Probably mostly watch freeview along with our panasonic DVD/PVR which can upsample if nec.

(Its interesting that on reflection the old CRT holds up well and is still a very good picture, be it freeview or DVD.)

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks,
Matthew

 

[Andy Clough]

Plasma is definitely a good choice if you watch a lot of sport and fast-paced action movies. Where have you been viewing the sets you've seen? If in-store, then they're very often fed a poor signal and are appallingly set-up.

Most of the Panasonic plasmas we've tested are excellent, and the main difference on the 85 models as I recall is better sound quality. Don't worry about the fans in the back - they're there to keep things cool, and shouldn't pose any problem.

You can read full reviews of the TH-46PZ85 and TH-42PZ80 here on the site.

 

[Anonymous]

mallen: The plasmas are better. The Pioneer 42" is the winner defo the best piccy quality but pricey and also no longer available (Im not buying something that is already ceased manufacture). That leaves the Panasonic Plasmas, not as good as the Pioneer but... Im considering the 42PZ85, 42PZ80, 46PZ85 or 46PZ80. Not sure which. Not sure if I can see the difference between the 80 and 85 range. Also noticed that some had fans in the back so am concerned about the longevity and noise etc. Probably mostly watch freeview along with our panasonic DVD/PVR which can upsample if nec.

All the PZ range have fans. They should be unobtrusive.

If you dont have a HD source, definitely consider the 42PX80 (HD ready, 720p, only about £630, but no 46" version). SD probably better than the PZs. And no fans on these. And when you do get a BluRay, it will happily accept 1080p/24fps films.

Panasonic dealers have free 5yr guarantee till end of July (if bought in the shop, not from internet sales)

 

[mallen]

Ok thanks fro the advice;

I think I will go for the 42" Pan. the 46" is a lot more money and also we will only be sitting about 4m away.

Had another look at the Pioneer it is the best on SD but also very good on HD. The BBC HD feed looked excellent and its not 1080 which is interesting. The 1080 Pan was second place but still good on full HD the PZ85 was significantly better than the PZ80. Screen judder was far less apparent. Still not as good as the Pioneer but ho hum....

Matthew

 

[Anonymous]

mallen:

Ok thanks fro the advice;

I think I will go for the 42" Pan. the 46" is a lot more money and also we will only be sitting about 4m away.

No point getting Full HD at that viewing distance, you wont be able to make out any difference to HD Ready. Save your money and get the PX80.

 

[FuzzyinLondon]

Totally agree with rewerb. Get the PX80 or pay the extra and get a 46" or 50" model. Personally, at that distance, I think you'd need a 50" to really appreciate FullHD even if you have the eyesight of a fighter pilot.

 

[mallen]

Thanks for the info.

I understand the point about Full HD v HD ready at a distance. Im still a bit confused though...

Why then do the mfcrs keep going on about Full HD so much, is it just a money making scam from the back of marketing hype. (Let s face it I would imagine most people sit not closer than 3m to a TV screen).

An example here is when a member of retail staff tells you that if you get Full HD you will be future proofed. Future proofed from what exactly? If there is no difference between HD ready and Full HD at say a 3m distance what is all the fuss about? I dont see the benefit apart from for the mfcrs in order to make more money out of you unless someone knows different. Comments?

I can see the benefit of the increased processing power which equated to smoother motion on the PZ85 against the PZ80. Certainly seeing the two side by side in JL showing the same picture from a distance of a couple of m the lack of judder on the 85 was noticeable, not a great deal but it was better.

I am a little bit lost really as I dont want to pay for something that is just marketing but has no real benefit. Comments

Matt

 

[FuzzyinLondon]

I think, for the most part, you've answered your own question there, specifically regarding marketing. I'm not saying that Full HD doesn't have benefits, it certainly does, but those benefits are conditional - you have to factor in the size of the set, viewing distance and the eyesight of the individual. To say that 1080p is a necessity for 'future-proofing' on a 42" is nonsense. For example, the 42PX80 will happily accept a 1080p input and downscale it to fit its native resolution. More important are it's colour reproduction abilities and blacks levels which imbue its pictures with a naturalism that few LCDs can match, certainly not at that price.

 

[Clare Newsome]

Full HD only comes into its own paired with a Full HD source (eg Blu-ray) and on a larger set (either 40in+ if you sit really close, or 50in+ if you sit further away).

In time, of course all sets and sources will be Full HD, but that's some way off (even the Blu-ray Disc Association doesn't expect Blu-ray sales to overtake DVD until Christmas 2012 - and that's overtake, not replace).

Please don't buy an inferior TV because you're choosing on tech-spec alone - a good HD Ready TV (with support for 1080p/24fps) will be far more watchable than a poor Full HD one.

 

[Sorreltiger]

As Claire has pointed out, it's no surprise that BBC HD looked good on an 'HD Ready' set as it isn't broadcast at 1080p anyway. ÿIf you're going to watch Freeview and upscaled DVDs, choosing Full HD would be (arguably) a waste of money and would probably produce an inferior picture because of all the unnecessary upscaling.

 

[Anonymous]

If Full HD is not important to you, then go for the Pioneer-428xd!! I only brought a Pana 42pz80 because I couldn't live without having full HD, if you're comtemplating just going HD ready, then surely you have to buy the award winning Kuro?

 

[mallen]

Thanks for the comments.

My point was that unless you sit closer than say 3m to a 42" screen Full HD is wasted, as Clare mentioned with larger screen sizes the distance is increased. I would imagine for most people buying a screen around the 40" mark and sitting 3m away, Full HD has no advantage or have I missed something?

The full HD 42" sets are significantly more expensive than the HD ready screens.

 

[Anonymous]

mallen: My point was that unless you sit closer than say 3m to a 42" screen Full HD is wasted, as Clare mentioned with larger screen sizes the distance is increased. I would imagine for most people buying a screen around the 40" mark and sitting 3m away, Full HD has no advantage or have I missed something?

The full HD 42" sets are significantly more expensive than the HD ready screens.

Exactly right. If you freeze a frame and get up close you can probably see more detail on the 1080 screen than the 720. But as soon as there is any motion the actual resolution goes down and it becomes very difficult to distinguish between them.

And all this talk about "future proofing" is baloney. As long as the TV will accept a 1080p signal and 24fps, that is sufficient. It matters not one jot what the actual screen pixel count is (720, 768, 1080), it matters how the TV processes the signal and displays it, with true colours, good contrast, smooth movement.