Originally Posted by claudekennilol
What is MgO? And I'm guessing since this is the top-of-the-line model, that it should have better (less) IR because of this new tech?
MgO is magnesium oxide, and is a chemical used in the production of plasma cells. Specifically it protects the electrodes from being damaged when the cell is activated. In the process it can "sputter" and end up on the phosphor itself, thus blocking a certain percentage of the light emissions from the impacted area. So if only certain parts of the panel are kept a high brightness for a long period of time, they'll pick up MgO and lose some brightness. Over time the MgO spreads out into the adjacent cells and the whole thing evens out, but it can take a long time.
There's a great discussion about it starting with this post here: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1338766/plasma-burn-in-and-100-000-hour-life-displays#post_20515151
What's interesting is that there have been a number of Plasma panels that didn't seem to exhibit this behavior. The >60" 2012 Samsungs and some of the old Pioneers are the ones I've seen in person that have excellent resistance to this type of long-duration IR (don't confuse it with the short, bright IR you get called residual charge; long-duration IR involves darkening the impacted area).
It's possible that Panasonic chose to use an alternative chemical here specifically to avoid IR. At least, I can't think of any other reason to make the change. The guy at HDJ doesn't describe any specific image quality benefits, so to me this sounds like a vague way of saying, "oh, and it's IR-resistant but we don't want to admit we had IR problems in 2012." As usual, no way to know for sure until the thing comes out.
Originally Posted by repete66211
Most comments regarding the differences between the VT and ZT have focused (understandably) on picture quality but what about the other differences? Despite the lower price point the VT has the standard integrated camera and (I think) extra speakers. These are two features I have no
interest in. Are they factoring in anyone else's decision making process?
Kind of odd, right? My thoughts are that they cut these things from the ZT to keep it from getting much more expensive than the VT, or simply because the people who will be interested in the ZT would be more insulted by them than anything else. Camera that pops up from the top of my flagship TV? Yeeeeah, no thanks.
Either that or they were trying to distinguish the VT from the GT in the non-NA markets, where the reviews out so far show very little noteworthy difference between the two models. In fact if it were available in NA at large sizes it seems like it might be the clear value winner, coming in much cheaper than the VT with nearly identical performance and the high end CPU.