BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW said:
I will be able to afford the VT65, though, PQ wise, I expect the GT60 is every bit as good, so I may wait until JL get the GT60 in, then ask the question.
What's the VT got, that the GT hasn't?
How's the VT65 with standard def pictures?
The difference between the GT60 and VT65 isn't night and day in terms of PQ.
The two main advantages are the filter, which seems extremely effective during daytime viewing, and the red phosphor, which makes reds look, well, more red. (That isn't hyperbole. Older Panasonics couldn't fully saturate red. You genuinely can tell the difference whenever you see a London bus, or postbox, etc. displayed). I'm not sure how much difference the extra shades of gradation make to shadow detail. I'd need to view both TVs, calibrated, side-by-side in a light controlled environment, with suitably testing content.
Aside from PQ, the dual tuner PVR functionality works wonders for me. I have a 1TB HDD attached, which is neatly tucked away and negates the need for an extra box in my already cluttered AV cabinet. I'm guessing this isn't important to you, since you use Sky.
The inbuilt speakers work better than I anticipated too. All sound options are a bit lame except for "Ambience," which sounds surprisingly full and natural. I watched Jools Holland last night and bass notes were reasonably punchy, tuneful, and defined. If you use your TV's inbuilt speakers at all, you'll appreciate the difference.
Beyond the above it's really down to styling. The VT65 is a nice looking TV. The one sheet of glass design really sets the picture off, while the clear strip at the bottom is a nice touch too.
I wouldn't blame you for saving a bit of money and going with the GT60. It's the best value option. I can only add that I wouldn't swap my VT65 for a GT60 and the difference in cost (though my requirements are subtly different from yours).