As the title says I was fortunate enough to see these side by side at CES. They were both in a light controlled area. Here are a few of my thoughts. Sorry they will not be very technically detailed but hopefully they will be of use to those deciding between the two, or thinking of holding off until the price of the 1080p drops.
They were set up to display the same set of still images. On each image they would draw a circle around the area that was supposed to show a difference between the two images. For example, there would be a picture of a book opened and then a circle would be drawn around the characters/letters (if memory serves me right they where Chinese characters, but I could be totally off).
So was there a difference? Yes there was. Was it significant? IMHO it was not. The most significant (and thus the one I remember) was the letter/characters in the book. This one I did see a difference the was beyond slight. But truthfully the 768 image was more the good for the writing in the book. The 1080 was clearer and I guess if I was reading a book on a plasma I would choose that one. But I have no immediate plans to read a book on a plasma. On all the other images the differences were so slight that unless it was side by side with a red circle around it you would not really notice a difference unless you were looking for it.
On other aspects of the image, I found the image on the 768 to have much better contrast and colors. The image as a whole looked better then the 1080. This I did notice and found to be a much bigger factor then the number of pixels the panel has.
So to conclude, if you are considering a 50" Panasonic and think the 768 is a much better choice even if you have the money to burn. You give up a bit of image clarity, but I fell you get better colors and contrast. Color and contrast, to me, are better indicators of image quality then clarity (is clarity the right word?) gained by more pixels.
Just to be up front. I do not own either plasma currently. Planning to get the 768 50 Panasonic in the next few weeks. This is purely my opinion based on what I saw, so YMMV.
They were set up to display the same set of still images. On each image they would draw a circle around the area that was supposed to show a difference between the two images. For example, there would be a picture of a book opened and then a circle would be drawn around the characters/letters (if memory serves me right they where Chinese characters, but I could be totally off).
So was there a difference? Yes there was. Was it significant? IMHO it was not. The most significant (and thus the one I remember) was the letter/characters in the book. This one I did see a difference the was beyond slight. But truthfully the 768 image was more the good for the writing in the book. The 1080 was clearer and I guess if I was reading a book on a plasma I would choose that one. But I have no immediate plans to read a book on a plasma. On all the other images the differences were so slight that unless it was side by side with a red circle around it you would not really notice a difference unless you were looking for it.
On other aspects of the image, I found the image on the 768 to have much better contrast and colors. The image as a whole looked better then the 1080. This I did notice and found to be a much bigger factor then the number of pixels the panel has.
So to conclude, if you are considering a 50" Panasonic and think the 768 is a much better choice even if you have the money to burn. You give up a bit of image clarity, but I fell you get better colors and contrast. Color and contrast, to me, are better indicators of image quality then clarity (is clarity the right word?) gained by more pixels.
Just to be up front. I do not own either plasma currently. Planning to get the 768 50 Panasonic in the next few weeks. This is purely my opinion based on what I saw, so YMMV.
