AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › Panasonic May End Plasma Production in 2014
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Panasonic May End Plasma Production in 2014 - Page 5

post #121 of 225
I thought OLED displays still have picture degradation issues over time. Have these issues been resolved?

I'll probably be due for and upgrade in a few years, and the thought of replacing my Panasonic plasma with not another Panasonic plasma is a little bothersome.
post #122 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Enough. This isn't a "which tech is better" debate. Picture quality is purely subjective. What looks good to one doesn't always look good to the next. Personally I believe the PNE7000 series is crap. Which is my point. Looks good to one. Doesn't mean it's the same for others. Move On.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

Fan boys unite!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icon13 View Post

If it is such crap why is it ranked 3rd in lab tested TVs on televisioninfo.com? It recieved a 9.2. What score, did yours get? My cousin is a graphic designer and an LCD fanboy. The instant he saw my Life blu-ray on my set, his jaw dropped and his opinion changed. You just cannot get that PQ on LCD. And, this was upon him borrowing my Life set for 3 weeks and returning it. He has a very keen eye and got a perfect score on the x-rite color hue test.

To be fair hockey looks like crap on my TV.
My plasma has no motion smoothing options. They are absent on 2011 and 2012 Samsung plasmas. tongue.gif

It's a craptastic tv. Re read what I said. See the post I quoted?
post #123 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post



It's a craptastic tv. Re read what I said. See the post I quoted?
I do not have to move on cause you told me to. My TV eats yours, bottom line. Go post your 70 posts per day elsewhere. The fact is LED is going to disappear faster than plasma did considering the PQ is crap compared to the next gen plasmas and OLEDs. Enjoy edgelit flashlighting in the meantime. Besides, the more you argue this the bigger hypocrite you look like telling me to move on.
post #124 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icon13 View Post

I do not have to move on cause you told me to. My TV eats yours, bottom line. Go post your 70 posts per day elsewhere. The fact is LED is going to disappear faster than plasma did considering the PQ is crap compared to the next gen plasmas and OLEDs. Enjoy edgelit flashlighting in the meantime. Besides, the more you argue this the bigger hypocrite you look like telling me to move on.
I was talking about "fan boys unite." Which you clearly are.

Picture quality is purely subjective as stated earlier. If you're not well enough to realize that just because you might find your plasma set superior doesn't mean it actually is then there's no helping you. And also no point in continuing forward.
post #125 of 225
I still watch a 15" Sylvania tube TV in my office on a daily basis, which I bought in 1990. 23 years and still going strong baby. What this had to do with anything, I'm not sure. Just felt a moment of pride there and felt like it would be nice to share it with you guys. biggrin.gif
post #126 of 225
I actually loved my CRT back in the day. Funny to see how much they sell for now vs 10 years ago.
post #127 of 225
Jesus Christ-- it's nothing but a fanboy flame war in here! AVS should have known you can't post any news about LCD or plasma without the mouth breathers crashing the party. I swear the trolls are breeding in this forum...

ON TOPIC: If this proves to be true it's a sad day for tv enthusiasts. Panasonic has always made a quality set and I especially appreciate how well these displays work for gaming.
Whatever your preference in display tech the simple fact remains that more choice is always better than less choice-- you "LED" guys just remember that your fancy backlit lcd panels would still have ****-awful contrast and ass-terrible motion if it weren't for the competition offered by competing plasma displays. Competition breeds innovation!

Anyway-- I hope this is just sensationalistic journalism at work. If not, I better start saving for a last shot at one of these 'dinosaurs'!
post #128 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatuglyguy View Post

Why exactly is LED better? Because it's thinner and brighter? My plasma is two inches deep at its thickest point (odd that you even bring this up since it has zero bearing on actual picture quality) and can get bright enough to hurt my eyes if I wanted.
Are they better because more people buy them? We all know the ad populum argument always works.

Also, if you haven't noticed, this is a website for HT enthusiasts, where most would prioritize picture quality over thinness, brightness and "how many X are being sold."


You are so right buddy............just the viewing angle alone on plasma, makes me a plasma lover. I have a fairly large home so i like the fact i can sit at almost every angle and enjoy my tv. A lot of people also like to talk of how much power they use, but for me i have no problem paying my electric bill lol.
post #129 of 225
My CRT kills all. Enough said.
post #130 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by JukeBox360 View Post

My CRT kills all. Enough said.
Plasma is the closest thing you can get to CRT nowadays. But yes, CRT is technically the best. Newer is not always better.

PS. I am no fan boy. I also own an LED, but appreciate the fine PQ only plasma can produce. I think the LED fan boys are in for a rude awakening when they see the F8500 is equally as bright as LED with black levels that blow LCD away with superior motion handling. Plasma, like LED, is constantly improving, thus keeping it ahead of the pack. I hope Panny continues to produce plasmas until OLED is worth it's price and proves longevity.
post #131 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

I've calibrated more than a handful of 103" plasma in 2012 alone. If you can't find it then,... Try harder. rolleyes.gif

From the other posts that states streaming is good enough, now it's clear to me with your choice of LCD over plasma, good enough is truly good enough for you. Nothing wrong with that, though.

Just googled them... $30K?!?!? Holy crap. Get a projector. It's again an issue of whether a human can perceive the difference, and again, the answer is no.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icon13 View Post

Idiocy or ignorance? Wrong, both! Funny thing is standing in my local Fry's the high end plasmas look far superior to all the LEDs around them. My PN64E7000 kills your TV. Also, LED is LCD and that technology was devised in the 70's for static images and not motion. That is why the slow pixel response rate of LCD is not suited for fast moving objects on screen.

Sorry. We solved that problem like 5+ years ago in the whole computer display area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

It's clear from your posts on this thread and other threads that you are NOT tech literate at the slightest.

I'm very much tech literate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5150zx View Post

You really need to stop now while you're behind! I'm sure the Sharp's are FLYING off shelves everywhere. LOL 65" only work in smaller rooms. LOL x2.
Poor me, I guess I 'try' to enjoy my two totally inferior Panny 65" plasmas. frown.gif

According to THX, a 60" TV is OK for 6-9 feet away. The ideal distance for a 65" TV is 6.5 feet, although I have my 60" at 8 feet, and it's all I can stand unless I move to RI and get non-re-compressed HD. Comcast's PQ sucks.

A 70" set would be good for about 7 feet, an 80 for about 8 feet. Personally, I think they're a bit aggressive with the screen size, but they're directionally accurate. Most people's TVs are WAY too small.
post #132 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post

Just googled them... $30K?!?!? Holy crap. Get a projector. It's again an issue of whether a human can perceive the difference, and again, the answer is no.
Sorry. We solved that problem like 5+ years ago in the whole computer display area.
I'm very much tech literate.
According to THX, a 60" TV is OK for 6-9 feet away. The ideal distance for a 65" TV is 6.5 feet, although I have my 60" at 8 feet, and it's all I can stand unless I move to RI and get non-re-compressed HD. Comcast's PQ sucks.

A 70" set would be good for about 7 feet, an 80 for about 8 feet. Personally, I think they're a bit aggressive with the screen size, but they're directionally accurate. Most people's TVs are WAY too small.
I agree with David. You sound hardly tech literate. I have a 64 inch and a 6.5 foot viewing distance would be plain stupid.

I do not even understand your argument about pixel response time. Care to ellaborate and share your omniscient super tech guru wisdom with the rest of us lowley brain morons? rolleyes.gif
post #133 of 225
Gee golly, who would have guessed this would turn into a plasma vs LCD flame war? Color me surprised.
post #134 of 225
Back to the original topic, I believe there is a disagreement within Panasonic management team or stockholders who are trying to spread rumors around so that to force the shutdown of the Plasma production. It's clear that Panasonic cannot compete in the under 40" size TV market and will not gain back any market share with their large size LCD. OLED TV will not bring them immediate financial miracle either. Why they want to shutdown their only advantage in TV business is beyond me. I don't believe they have done enough in the past few years to try to win back the mindshare of the general public or react fast enough on pricing for their Plasma and just wasted all their engineering effort spent all these years. If the rumor is true, they might just throw up their towels now on their TV business and sell the Plasma technology to a China Consumer brand while it's still worth some money.
post #135 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post


According to THX, a 60" TV is OK for 6-9 feet away. The ideal distance for a 65" TV is 6.5 feet, although I have my 60" at 8 feet, and it's all I can stand unless I move to RI and get non-re-compressed HD. Comcast's PQ sucks.

A 70" set would be good for about 7 feet, an 80 for about 8 feet. Personally, I think they're a bit aggressive with the screen size, but they're directionally accurate. Most people's TVs are WAY too small.

Since when THX recommend 70" viewed from 7ft, 80" from 8ft? Again and again you claim to be tech literate yet you keep coming up with nonsensical arguments.
post #136 of 225
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

Since when THX recommend 70" viewed from 7ft, 80" from 8ft? Again and again you claim to be tech literate yet you keep coming up with nonsensical arguments.

Ever since THX recommended the optimum viewing distance is the screen's diagonal measurement divided by .84

70" x .84 = 6.9444 feet

80" x .84 = 7.93 feet

http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-entertainment/home-theater/hdtv-set-up/
post #137 of 225
How the hell did this topic turn into a Plasma vs LCD war? Who gives a damn if you like either one? Just enjoy what you have. Plasma's have their good and bad points as well as LCD. I think this thread is about the rumor that Panasonic is getting out of the Plasma buisness not which tech is better.
post #138 of 225
It would be disappointing to see Panasonic get out of the plasma market but it wouldn't come as a surprise given that they have gotten into making larger LCD/LED sets. After having owned an LED set, I have to say that I prefer the picture quality of plasma, and the screen uniformity on plasma is terrific.
post #139 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve1971 View Post

How the hell did this topic turn into a Plasma vs LCD war? Who gives a damn if you like either one? Just enjoy what you have. Plasma's have their good and bad points as well as LCD. I think this thread is about the rumor that Panasonic is getting out of the Plasma buisness not which tech is better.
All about the e-pen!
post #140 of 225
Still have my first panasonic 50" in my bedroom. Think I bought it in '05. Good and solid TVs
post #141 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

Ever since THX recommended the optimum viewing distance is the screen's diagonal measurement divided by .84

70" x .84 = 6.9444 feet

80" x .84 = 7.93 feet

http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-entertainment/home-theater/hdtv-set-up/

That is not optimum viewing distance, though. That's minimum viewing distance as per THX training document.

note: I know it's within the range but it is not the optimum viewing distance.
post #142 of 225
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

That is not optimum viewing distance, though. That's minimum viewing distance as per THX training document.

note: I know it's within the range but it is not the optimum viewing distance.

I don't know if it's semantics or what, but on their web site the term used is "best", not minimum.

"How do you calculate the best seat-to-screen distance for a plasma, LCD TV or projection screen? Divide the size of your screen by .84 (screen size is measured diagonally). For example, a 65-inch TV divided by .84 equals a 77-inch viewing distance (6.5 feet)." - source: THX.com
Edited by imagic - 3/21/13 at 11:42am
post #143 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View PostI don't know if it's semantics or what, but on their web site the term used is "best", not minimum.

"How do you calculate the best seat-to-screen distance for a plasma, LCD TV or projection screen? Divide the size of your screen by .84 (screen size is measured diagonally). For example, a 65-inch TV divided by .84 equals a 77-inch viewing distance (6.5 feet)."

So for a 130" screen wide, I should sit 12' 10" away, Well I sit 10 feet away and it is very nice :)

post #144 of 225
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

So for a 130" screen wide, I should sit 12' 10" away, Well I sit 10 feet away and it is very nice smile.gif

THX is a set of recommendations; if rules are meant to be broken then recommendations are made to be ignored, based on personal preferences. It's probably a reflection of where you like to sit in movie theaters, some people prefer the front rows. I know I used to, back when I went to movie theaters.

"Don’t Go Too Big For Your Room
The idea of having 120-inch display may seem like a good idea, but if you buy one that’s too big, it could compromise your entertainment experience. Choosing the appropriate size display comes down to how far away you are sitting from the screen. If you buy a massive display and sit three feet away, you’re going to be staring at pixels and lines. 

To determine the best seat-to-screen distance in your living room for a 1080p display, THX recommends dividing the diagonal screen by .84. For example, a plasma or LCD TV with a 65-inch screen divided by .84 equals a 77-inch viewing distance (6.5 feet)."
- Source: THX.com
post #145 of 225
Those alleged optimum viewing distances are negligible anyways now that TVs are 3d. If I sat 6.5 ft from my screen during 3d I would projectile vomit all over it. Just sayin'. eek.gif
post #146 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View PostTHX is a set of recommendations; if rules are meant to be broken then recommendations are made to be ignored, based on personal preferences. It's probably a reflection of where you like to sit in movie theaters, some people prefer the front rows. I know I used to, back when I went to movie theaters."Don’t Go Too Big For Your Room
The idea of having 120-inch display may seem like a good idea, but if you buy one that’s too big, it could compromise your entertainment experience. Choosing the appropriate size display comes down to how far away you are sitting from the screen. If you buy a massive display and sit three feet away, you’re going to be staring at pixels and lines. 

To determine the best seat-to-screen distance in your living room for a 1080p display, THX recommends dividing the diagonal screen by .84. For example, a plasma or LCD TV with a 65-inch screen divided by .84 equals a 77-inch viewing distance (6.5 feet)." - Source: THX.com

Yes, my room is 20 feet long so it's not to big I just like to sit close to the speakers and at the limit of being able to distinguished pixels! I like total immersion :)

post #147 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icon13 View Post

I agree with David. You sound hardly tech literate. I have a 64 inch and a 6.5 foot viewing distance would be plain stupid.

I do not even understand your argument about pixel response time. Care to ellaborate and share your omniscient super tech guru wisdom with the rest of us lowley brain morons? rolleyes.gif

Sorry, I guess the established experts in this industry at THX are just idiots. That would be a fantastic experience if you have FIOS. Not so much on Comcast.

Once they dropped below 15ms, and that was years ago, the speed was no longer a factor for gaming and video applications.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

Since when THX recommend 70" viewed from 7ft, 80" from 8ft? Again and again you claim to be tech literate yet you keep coming up with nonsensical arguments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

Ever since THX recommended the optimum viewing distance is the screen's diagonal measurement divided by .84

70" x .84 = 6.9444 feet

80" x .84 = 7.93 feet

http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-entertainment/home-theater/hdtv-set-up/

^^this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

THX is a set of recommendations; if rules are meant to be broken then recommendations are made to be ignored, based on personal preferences. It's probably a reflection of where you like to sit in movie theaters, some people prefer the front rows. I know I used to, back when I went to movie theaters.

Yeah, the biggest thing is that they are basically assuming you're using VUDU HDX and Verizon FIOS where you have no quality degradation. If you're watching a mix of HD and SD video, playing Wii, and using Comcast, the story is a little different. The other thing is that if you're more than 9 feet away, you're forced to go front projection, as you've left the end of the flat panel lineup, which for all practical purposes, ends at 90" with Sharp's monster of a set.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icon13 View Post

Those alleged optimum viewing distances are negligible anyways now that TVs are 3d. If I sat 6.5 ft from my screen during 3d I would projectile vomit all over it. Just sayin'. eek.gif

Yeah, for all that 3D content. Seriously, 3D is absolute garbage. I tried it once on my Sharp TV, and it's a freaking mess. Put the glasses back on the shelf and haven't touched them since. It's a great 2D TV.
post #148 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccll0 View Post

well that sucks if true. but i can see why, panasonic is bleeding money like crazy.

So they will end production of $1500 TV's and produce $15,000 TV's, oh yes that makes sense worked great for Pioneer. Try educating the consumer to the benefits of plasma and while your at it educate the sales force too.
Love my Panasonic P55GT50
post #149 of 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by dargo View Post

So they will end production of $1500 TV's and produce $15,000 TV's, oh yes that makes sense worked great for Pioneer. Try educating the consumer to the benefits of plasma and while your at it educate the sales force too.
Love my Panasonic P55GT50

What benefits? The consumer market has moved on. LED-LCD is the path forward, maybe eventually to OLED, like mobile that is using SAMOLED.
post #150 of 225
A path backward for videophiles with the glut of edge-lit panels.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Latest Industry News
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › Panasonic May End Plasma Production in 2014