With regard to the XX525 vs the XX725/XX825 Mitzis, the main dif between the 525 and the other two is the screen although there are other features (cosmetics & Technical). The 725/825 feature the same "low-glare" screen that they use on the CRT RPTs in the Diamond series. If you see the two side by side, there is a visual difference, but the low-glare screen still has some reflections and it cannot be compared to any of the typical Sammy, LG, or JVC screens which don't reflect anything. The company line is that it reduces glare by 70% over the glass-finish 525 screen, so take that for what it's worth. I honestly think that the Mitzi (outer) screen covers add something to the PQ but it's hard to describe. There's a little more depth, sharpness, or something.
Most dealers already know that the outer screen is consumer removeable and that there are instructions in the manual for doing this. According to a Bernies rep in our local store, Mitsubishi will be selling a "trim kit" that consists of a snap-in frame and it will cover the unsightly outer fastening edge of the main screen when you remove the glossy screen. He said the price of the kit will be $60 and it should be available in October.
In other threads here in AVS one poster has suggested a viable alternative would be to go to a frame shop and have them cut a exact-size replacement for the glossy screen using low-glare photographic lexan. This will probably cost less than $50, but the one "problem" would be that you might see some border stuff that you won't like. Solution... mask off the backside and spray a black krylon border to match the factory look. The only thing missing would be the Mitsubishi decal, and that might be available from a number of sources.
The Mitzi XXX25 DLPs are generally acknowledged to have a great picture, and connectivity is also excellent. About the only drawback is the glare, and it seems like it's resoveable. If Mitsubishi marketing reps read this thread, they should take note of the glare issue because it could be costing them sales. The screen on the 725/825 is a marked improvement and suggests that the screen in the 525 is detremental to sales and a mistake. What they should do is offer all 525 owners a replacement screen at no cost (call it a retrofit) or charge them $100.00 not $200.00. By selling a replacement screen and/or offering it on the 725 they are already admitting they made a mistake, so why not build some consumer equity by doing the right thing? Are you listening Mitsubishi? It's part of your Marketing 101 mantra... you have to spend money to make money.