[mattg3]

I actually got a different feeling watching the 43 cmx next to the panny sd42.Maybe Im crazy but everythig seemed fuller and more detailed.perhaps it was the way the store had the displays tuned or maybe the higher resolution rate of the pioneer? Anyone else get to directly compare these units?

Why do you think pioneer went up to 43 on this unit?

 

[Video]

Why did they make 43"?


Bigger is better, every inch counts.

 

[GGoodrum]

I too found the extra inch as a big plus. Before I got my 433, I saw the 4330 next to a 50 inch, and a 42-inch next to a 50-inch, and the size difference wasn't as "dramatic" between the 43/50 and the 42/50.


-- Gary

 

[djs]

As they said in Spinal Tap, "This one goes to 11."


If you don't know the quote, you should see the movie...

 

[scmguru]

Hows the 433 for SDTV.. I might have to give up my dreams of a panny by xmas and get the 433.. (no panny @ electrograph)..

 

[jhersco]

I had read that the Panasonic 42PD3-P was the best 42" plasma monitor, despite it's lower pixel count than the "true-HD" models. When I viewed it side by side with the more expensive 42PHD4P, by Panasonic, I was convinced. It clearly outperformed this HD model in brightness, contrast and overall PQ with both SD and HD sources.


Then, I saw the Pioneer 4330 (mostly the same components as the 433 CMX,) and the Panasonics side by side at Tweeter. Everyone in my group saw the same thing: The Pioneer had a considerably more detailed picture and was brighter overall than the Panasonic 42PD3-P. The Panny's blacks were slightly deeper, but the advantage narrowed when we set the Pioneer black level to high.


Using SD sources, both brands suffered compared to HD. I could not see any significant difference between the 4330 and the 42PD3P.


Since then, I've learned that the 433CMX is superior in PQ to the 4330; has a video card slot that provides for future upgradability, and costs a lot less. From what I can see, with the video card, it is a Pioneer Elite (minus the wide bezel,) for a whole lot less money.


Contest over. I'm getting a 433CMX.

 

[mattg3]

Was that tweeter in peabody ma.I had the same experience along with another forum member.Didnt change any of the settings but the panny 42 couldnt hold to the 4330.In another tweeter in ma. the panny was in a dark room and looked great and the pioneer didnt because it was facing the sun.Ive gone the same thought route you have and am heading toward the 433cmx.Isnt the 433cmx a hd set with higher resolution since i saw pixilation on the panny at 5ft but none on the pioneer?

 

[DonBerg]

Yes the Pioneer 433CMX is a HD plasma 1024x768, its more comparable to the Panasonic HD5 model (not the cheaper SD WD5 model you are comparing with). At 6feet or less you need to go with an HD model, since the pixels are too visible on the SD models with 852x480 resolution. The better blacks on the Panasonics is more noticeable in a very dark room environment too. In a well lighted room, it would be very difficult to see much difference.

 

[mattg3]

Thanks Don finally someone has given me a direct answer.Now what about this dvds are soft and fuzzy on hd unit stuff Ive been running into on the forum?Im mostly a dvd person so will the hd pioneer 433 give me the right stuff or do I need to just accept the pixels and go with the panny 42.Unfortunately everthing in all the brick and morter stores is a high def feed and Ive never seen dvds on a plasma Matt

 

[jhersco]

The Tweeter I mentioned is in San Diego. I watched a DVD there on both Pannys and the Pioneer 4330. For me, the relative results were the same -- the Pioneer was brighter and more detailed. The PQ was not as good as HDTV -- softer, but not fuzzy. From more than 8 feet away, the view was definitely satisfying.

 

[mattg3]

thanks jhersco that just about puts the -dvs are better on sd than hd confusion away for me.