Looking for a 42" Low End Plasma for PC Gaming / Monitor  

Panasonic at that price point.

http://www.*******************.com/p...uy-review.html

I don't think you are going to do much better than the 7UY panasonic model. Many people can't tell the difference between that model and the HDTV model from distances over 10 feet. As far as using it as a monitor ... It will accept the higher resolutions and convert them to 852x480. I asked a similar question in the display devices thread, and was told that text is not very sharp. I would imagine that (pure speculation here) that the gaming graphics would still look very good, considering how good 1920x1080 converted to 852x480 looks on the set. I was in the same boat as you a few months ago, looking to spend between 1500-2000 on an EDTV. I ended up getting a Pioneer PDP-434CMX for about 1000 more. The Pioneer is a real HDTV (1024x768), and for the extra money I felt it was worth it. A forum member named JuiceRocket is gaming on an EDTV plasma. I am not sure if he is using a PC on his at the moment, but maybe he has in the past. He is a cool guy, and I am sure he will give you some info if he has any.

Console gaming will look great on an ED Plasma, as current consoles only output 480p at best, with the exception of a handful of 720p Xbox games. I have a Panasonic PWD 42" ED and I haven't seen anything that looks better for 480p gaming (almost everything).

If you are going to be doing extensive PC work and/or hooking up an HTPC, you might want to consider an HD set. I haven't hooked up a PC to my ED so I don't know how it looks. I assume it would be fine but that the extra resolution would be useful for PC use. Of course if you are sitting 10' or more from the monitor you might not be able to notice that extra resolution at the 42" size...

One other thing - when you get your set, make sure to calibrate it (either professionally, or using Avia or Digital Video Essentials yourself) before using it, especially if you are using it with a PC. Plasma tend to ship with their contrast and/or brightness set high ("torch mode") and this can increase the risk of burn-in in the first 100 hours or so, particularly with HTPC input (eg, static window bars, icons, etc.)

I really can't offer a comparison between the Pioneer and the Panasonic, because I have never used the Panasonic. I opted for the HDTV becuase of its higher resolution. I can't imagine web browsing would be too good in 480p, and I do some web browsing on my HTPC. The bottom line for me was that I felt there was enough value/life in the HDTV model to justify spending the extra 1000 dollars. I hope this helps somewhat.

For the money, the Panasonic cannot be beat, but when it comes to higher end product and cost is less of an issue, its always hard to beat Pioneer. Their CRT RP's and Plasma's have been at the top of the field for years now.

I'd worry about Plasma burn-in (which is easier to do than you think) if using primarily for PC or gaming. It could turn into a $2000 paper weight after a few months.

Jasman

Plasma burn-in, with a modern PDP panel, is pretty much a non-issue at this point. Please see the master burn-in thread in the flat-panel forum: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=444258 for more information.

Do make sure to properly calibrate your Plasma display (if you get one) before heavy use.

I have an ED 7UY Panasonic PDP, purchased from visualapex (forum sponsor) for a fraction above your price range (including delivery)... my seating distance is about 11 feet and my screen looks just as good, if not better, than the HD displays i've seen at bestbuy. the clowns at the couple of bestbuys i've been to probably don't know what they are doing, but i've been extremely pleased with this unit. do make sure that you use quality cables, it makes all the difference.

regarding the akai and maxent models you're looking into, i wouldn't waste $1000 on those things. again, my experience has been with big chain B&M stores but even relative to the other displays (which must have been set up similarly), they were just junk. not even watchable IMO.

For the record (and I even recommended the Panasonic for the money), regardless of what you think you see on your EDTV, its not comparable to a true HDTV when being fed an HD signal. Of course your TV look as good as an HDTV when fed a 480i or 480p signal because both TV's are displaying the same output resolution, but I find it very silly to say that an EDTV looks as good as an HDTV without even factoring in the benefits of an HDTV which is, displaying a 720p or 1080i signal. No 480p output on an EDTV is even going to come close to a720p or 1080i output on a HDTV.

At 13' (my seating distance) the difference is very marginal, and to most people, imperceptible.

When I go up to a 50" at the same distance, I will (of course) want an HD display, but at 42", it doesn't make a lot of sense.

YMMV, make sure to check out for yourself the difference before buying either, etc etc.

If you can't tell the difference between a 480p signal and 720p/1080i signal, you need glasses. It really is just that simple.

And for the record, I have seen the difference first hand, a good friend of mine has a 7UY, and I have a Pioneer Elite HDTV, the difference with a 720p/1080i signal is HUGE. A downscaled 720p or 1080i signal just looks blurry compared to a true 720p/1080i signal on an HDTV.

Many people in the Flatscreen forum disagree. They say at distances greater than 10 feet, the difference is not detectable.

You know, word 'round here says that people have opinions and are entitled to them. :)

For all involved, let's not go starting another flame thread about HD vs ED.

I sit more than 10 ft away from my TV everyday and its night and day difference between HD and SD. I can't speak for everyone else, all I can say is that my eyesite works correctly. I mean Hell, if this were this were the case, why would anyone care about HD since you can't tell the difference anyway? I mean, its only twice the resolution as SD. Who would really notice that?

Size matters, and many people do say purchasing a 42" HDTV is a waste of money. I obviously don't agree, since I purchased a 43" Pioneer HDTV (close enough to 42"). Resolution alone does not make a picture look better. Its resolution spread over area that matters. For example, many smaller CRT HDTV reviews (34" inch for example) state that they can not tell the difference between DVD and High Definition content. This is because 480 lines is adequate for that display size. Anyone who has seen DVD on a 50+ inch TV can tell you there is a huge difference between HDTV and DVD. I honestly can see a difference between DVD and HDTV on my plasma. But I sit closer than 10 feet.

Well certainly the smaller the TV gets, the harder it is to see the difference. But, last time I checked, TV's are getting bigger, not smaller so its a moot point.

Blkout, I'm not aware of any 42" or 43" HD units that are < $2K....but I could be wrong.

And for the record, I'm one of those whose eyes you think need checking as I don't see twice the difference in pq between an ED and a HD unit. Shouldn't there be at more than twice the resolution? I see maybe 10%, but there is a difference with a HD feed.

Is that worth the difference in price between the two to you? Maybe, but only you know that answer. It wasn't to me.

I think if you purchase a 42" TV... it will be a 42" TV when you take it out the box, and it will still be 42" when you put it out on the curb in 10 years. That TV isn't going to change in size, so I think your point is the one that is moot.

I agree that HD is the way to go. Even at 42", I wouldn't have it any other way. But that doesn't mean that SD doesn't look perfectly acceptable to most others at 42".

If you own a 42" TV then you should be able to clearly see the difference between HD and SD, if you own a 20" TV, I could understand the difference being less noticable. Apparently my comment about TV's getting bigger went right over your head. I never said anyone's TV's was physically shrinking, I'm saying that if you're getting ready to buy a new TV, chances are its going to be bigger than 20" and if that's the case, an HDTV will certainly look better than EDTV when displaying HD material.

It did not go over my head at all. I was not implying you were saying TVs were shrinking. I was trying to stear the conversation back towards 42" TVs, and not industry trends. Again, I agree that HD is the only way to go (for me). I am saying that it is a popular opinion that 42" is not large enough to tell a difference. The largest difference I have heard of is 10% loss, and that is at differences farther than 10 feet. I clearly see a difference, but I am closer than 10 feet. I am glad you are enjoying your HDTV, I enjoy mine as often as possible as well.

Back to the original question I've seen both a Zenith and Panasonic at your price point and I prefer the slight contrast advantage that the Panasonic seems to have.