Friday, August 11, 2006
Now that Michael's company has finished being purchased, and we're sure he's not getting laid off (three times was enough, already!), we're ready to get that new TV. I've done so much research that my head is going mushy. So - drum roll please - here are the two between which we are chosing:
The Panasonic TH-42PHD9UK (the predecessor to the 8UK which is almost identical except the new model is 10lbs lighter and has a better image contrast ratio of 10000:1 instead of 3000:1). We'd have to buy a stand or mount for the wall, which is ok; there are no speakers, which is fine because we have the home theatre system; and it's pretty naked, which is ok too because we can expand it and we like the minimalist look. It's fanless, so very quiet, and supports the most resolutions (480i, 480p, 525i, 525p, 625i, 625p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p) and, because it's an industrial model, gives the user control of each color setting individually.
The Pioneer PDP-4360HD. It comes with a stand, speakers and a receiver box so that there is only one cord going from the set. It's lighter than most 42" plasmas, despite being a 43" and has tons of connections because of that receiver box. Additionally, it has six picture adjustment settings, which is a couple more than most units. The bonus of this tv is that it comes with everything we need and more. On the other hand is the "and more" part since we already have a theatre system and will have a tuner through the cable company, the stand is really all we'd need.
All that having been said, both received excellent reviews everywhere I looked - most importantly CNET which gave the Pioneer 0.2 higher (8.0 to the Panasonic's 7.8), mainly because it came with everything. However, CNET picked the Panasonic as an Editor's Choice and users rated the Panasonic higher because of its picture and price. The Panasonic is less expensive, sans stand (and even with it would still be less expensive than the Pioneer).
As of now, I'm leaning toward the Panasonic. What's your opinion?
3 comment(s):
Panasonic does not have enough inputs nor does it have an HDMI input at all.
HDMI is a pure digital connection... now you *may* not be able to tell the difference betweent that and component up through 1080i but I know in the back of my mind I would always be thinking it's not as good as it 'could' be.
You guys don't have the video games or anything but from what I can see the Panasonic only has ONE component input, which means that if you are going to watch a DVD on a progressive player with component out you are either going to have to get an expensive switcher or unplug your cable/sat (whichever you go with) and plug in the DVD player.
My TV has 2 component and 1 HDMI and all are connected to something. The Pioneer has 3 component and 2 HDMI... oh how I would LOVE that.
Not only does HDMI in theory look better but eventually movie studios are going to be using something called an 'image constraint token' which... if you ever get HD-DVD or Blu Ray... will be NEEDED to play a movie at full resolution (retarded yes).
I think the Pioneer is the better option for you 'the consumer' looking to buy something for your home.
You won't be using the speakers on the TV anyway... I don't know anyone who owns a panel display that has speakers who actually uses the ones on the display.
Actually, we'd get an HDMI (or 2 maybe) for the Panasonic. The MAIN reason I'm leaning toward that one is because it's one of the few (in a decent price range) that also handles 1080p which is what the HD-DVD and Blu Ray are.
You're right that we won't use the speakers, nor will we need the receiver box and the styling of the Panasonic is cleaner and LESS consumer looking which is what we want.
This is a tv we'll have for a long time so I want something that can handle future technology (meaning 1080p) and that has the best picture quality which the Panasonic has. It's expandible and more customizable than most tv's out there and, therefore, is better priced (even after the stand and HDMI input, we'd still come out better than the Pioneer which has more than we'd use and is less equipped for the long haul).
cool just make sure you get that HDMI card... from the quick look I did on AVSforums those are not easy to get... though people tend to exaggerate now and then
from what I have heard on 1080p via Microsoft's HD people (I'm a podcast dork)... not a lot of movies will be encoded in a 1080p format... the framerate of the film production (24fps) makes 60 frames per second look crappy unless it's a movie that was shot using digital like Star Wars 3
basically Terminator 2 in 1080p is going to be just as good as 1080i because the masters for the movie are in 24fps
basically we are stuck with 24fps movies for a long time (with exceptions) because so much about making movies including real-time special effects has to do with fooling the audience with motion... imagine watching a car flip in 60 updates per second and seeing very clearly that there are plastic dummies inside... that is what movie studios don't want
http://feeds.feedburner.com/MajorNelsonblogcast
look for "HD-DVD"
articles on the internet are nice, but hearing people talk about it is very enlightening... these are people that would never write an article too because they are too busy working on the tech
Post a Comment