Wanted to get some opinions here..
TV will be mounted above a fireplace, and hooked up to a Sony VAIO media center PC. There are very large windows on the left wall as one faces the screen.

I was all set to pull the trigger on the Sharp 52" D92 (as the best LCD out there), and then Panasonic released the 58" 700/750 series. I've seen the 700, and it looks amazing. Due to employee pricing, I can get the 58" 750U for only ~$500 more than the Sharp 52D92. The catch is:

Is the Panasonic going to cause problems with glare, and burn in, given the windows, and the fact that its hooked up to a computer?

Is anyone using the Panasonic in a sunlight room (with sun coming in at 90degree angle to the screen.
Thanks!

^^^
When you say one window faces the screen? Do you mean that the window would be behind your seating area? If so I would forget plasma, unless you can completly blackout any light that can get through a drape or covering. Just won't work for you in the daylight time. Placement of a plasma is critical where windows in a room are.

If I had to buy a TV today I'd buy the 50" 5080 Pioneer from the plasma catergory and I'd buy the Sony 52XBR2 form the LCD world. And between these two I'd buy the Sony. Its a great TV and priced right.

And if you can wait, I'd look at the new Samsungs 71/81 series, Toshiba 52lx177, and Sony XBR4 LCD's.
Plasma the new 1080P Pioneer plasmas should be nice.

BTW: Sharp make great TV's and I'd wait till better feedback from their on going banding problem. I'm a big Sharp fan but it looks like a wait and see.

The Window is at 90 degrees to the screen.
Just out of curiosity? Why the pioneer? The panasonic is 1080p, vs the 5080, which is only 720p. I've seen the Pioneer 1080P, but it only comes in 50", and its twice the price of the Panasonic, and honestly, doesn't look better.

I dismissed the Sony simply because its $1k more than the Sharp (I get employee pricing on both Sharp and Panasonic), and the lack of 120hz refresh. I have yet to see any banding on the Sharp 92us I've looked at..perhaps this was fixed?

Any ideas? The 750U supposedly has a decent antiglare coating. Can anyone confirm this?

As much as a plasma could give you a better picture, if you have a window perpendicular to the screen, you're going to get glare with a plasma. If you are going to be watching TV when there would be lots of light coming through that window, the LCD is probably a better choice. If you are going to do most of your viewing at night or in the evening, I would go with the Panasonic.

The anti-glare coating on the 750U is similar (although not as effective) as the coating on the 77U. For the OP's setup, it would not be effective enough for daytime viewing.

The 768p 5080 has a better picture then the 1080p Panny, which goes to show that all, and I mean all the experts know what they are talking about when they say that unless you are sitting very close, 1080p is mostly marketing hype advanced by the LCD manufactures.

768p (1024x768) is simply not an option, as this will be hooked up a media center PC, and this resolution is too low for a large screen. Its also completely obsolete at this point, with all the new HD-DVD/Blu-ray content coming out.

In addition, I'm not sure how you get that the Pioneer 5080 is better than the 750u Panasonic, which is more in the class of the FHD-1 (and looks better IMO). Its a newer generation screen, with a better processor and scaler.

Perhaps its in the eye of the beholder, but even with all the fancy antialiasing and smoothing algorithms out there, 1080p has TWICE as many pixels, and there is nothing in the world that can compensate for that.

I picked the Sharp for LCD since it has significantly better black levels than the Sony, and less motion blur. I've not seen any banding on recent models I've looked at.

Thanks for the tips on plasma however. It looks like its not that usable for daytime viewing, given the reflections on dark scenes. Because this is being used to display artwork during the day, its a deal killer..:-(

In addition, I'm not sure how you get that the Pioneer 5080 is better than the 750u Panasonic, which is more in the class of the FHD-1 (and looks better IMO). Its a newer generation screen, with a better processor and scaler.

Perhaps its in the eye of the beholder, but even with all the fancy antialiasing and smoothing algorithms out there, 1080p has TWICE as many pixels, and there is nothing in the world that can compensate for that.

(


:eek: I can't believe someone actually said that. If there are any noobs out there, please do not take this advice. I would rather own a good 720p set than an average 1080p, and most knowledgeable people would say the same. Under your logic a Westinghouse 42" LCD has a better picture than a 40" Sony S3000. Not gonna happen my friend...you need to reeducate.

Any ideas? The 750U supposedly has a decent antiglare coating. Can anyone confirm this?

Having seen all three (Panny 700U, Panny 77U, and the Sharp 92U LCD), I can confirm that it's better than the average plasma, but no where (and I mean, NO WHERE) near as good as the anti-glare on the 77U, which is *nearly* LCD good (not quite, but *nearly*).

As soon as Panasonic slaps a 77U screen on a 750U (meaning, 1080p), I will drop even entertainng the thought of the LCD. Call it marketing hype if you will, but I'm 8-10 feet from a 58" screen. I will see the difference. And, as the other guy intimated, pixel count is a physical factor you can't "adjust".

Incidentally, imho, I also agree with that other guy that 720p (or 768, for that matter) is a dying commodity. Rightly or wrongly, 1080p is where the technology is now (and 1440 is not too far off). Perhaps its' the stick-your-head-in-the-sand mentality of plasma makers that 720p is fine and you can't even see the difference that is permitting LCD to gain market share at an alarming clip. It doesn't matter if it makes a difference or not (although, in my case, in my viewing situation, with my video sources, it certainly will); what matters is that plasma-makers aren't doing themselves any favors by failing to keep pace and pushing a product which many, many consumers consider to be dated and a generation (or two) old.

--Mav

While I agree with seeing a difference between 768p and 1080p on a 58" screen from 8', the difference at 50" or 52" is, in most cases, imperceivable. 1080p is currently a buzzword for most sizes although that is where the future is headed. At larger sizes, it is justified, but most smaller sizes don't benefit from 1080p (at least from the viewing distance of most Americans). 1440 IS far off. Until they can figure out a better compression scheme that what's currently in use, 1080p will be relegated to HD disc formats (and download services in the near future). 1440 will not see widespread use for a considerable time to come, at least in consumer products.

1440 will not see widespread use for a considerable time to come, at least in consumer products.

Yeah, that's probably true (although, nothing in this area surprises me with how fast it moves). My statement was just hyperbole to drive home the point about the relevance of 1080p in the marketplace.

Thanks!

--Mav

As someone who runs 1920x1200 on a 15.4 widescreen laptop, there is no way, I will ever be convinced that dropping down to half that resolution makes a better picture. I still maintain there is no substitute for pixel count.

I completely agree that a bad, or even average 1080p display will be bested by a high end 768p. However, the Panasonic 750u is not exactly in the "Average" catagory. I've seen it side by side to an FHD-1, hooked to an HD-DVD player on a media center PC, and it looks *better* in most ways. I've not seen it side by side to a 5080, but supposedly this is lower end than the FHD-1.

That being said, it looks like I'm going to go with the Sharp, or the new Sony XBR4 LCDs. Reflections are a deal killer. The 77U panasonic is nice, but again, its only 768P (and the Sharp blows it away).

Finally, due to EPP pricing, the Panasonics and Sharps are much, MUCH less than Pioneers...

Thanks for all the tips on the thread, its appreciated!