AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
We're buying a new plasma soon.

Now the Toshiba model is the exact copy of the succeful Panny.

And so these are it's specs:

Resolution: 852x480

Contrast: 3000:1 (yeah i know it's just for show and more like 800:1)

Brightness: 780 cdm/2

Pixel size: 1.08mm

I found two specs sheets for the Toshiba:

1. From their site..

2. From Plasma Point store..


Ones stating a 780 cdm/2 and one 650 cdm/2, which one is the correct?

I know the new Panny is 780, are there two version for the Toshiba?


And these are the Fujitsu PDS-4242 specs:

Resolution: 1024x1024

Contrast: 500:1

Brightness: 750 cdm/2

Pixel size: 0.72mm


I heard the new 50" Fujitsu are great, but looking at their specs they're rated as 3000:1 contrast, so i assume they're a not the same as this 42" model.. although both do support Fujitsu's AVM and ALiS.

At 500:1 i believe the black levels on this display probably not as good as the Toshiba.. Anyone actually seen this one??


Let's say I can get them for the same price, and I would use it with my HTPC, which one would you have taken? I know the Toshiba rulez being same as the Panny.. and I had a very bad expierence with old Fujitsu models, that suffered from the solarisation effect greatly. I'm afraid this one will be the same.


What would you take?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,098 Posts
What sort of pricing did you get for the 4242?


Keep in mind that Fujitsu is alot more practical about contrast ratios, than panasonic or Toshiba. Their numbers are likely to be true...


Pete Putman, I believe, was able to rate the panasonic plasmas at around 680:1 - but that was peak contrast ratio (i.e., typical contrast ratio not even that high).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Yeah I know they over rate the contrast to fit the consumers eye..


I dunno actually the exact price, just know we can get one cheap through some contacts cause of the insurence..

But assuming they're priced about the same, which would u take?


I need an answer quickly, i believe we'll order tomorrow or on monday.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,172 Posts
The Fujitsu 4242 is the current ALiS model. The 4233 is a non-ALiS 42. I think they both offer AVM, by the way. I also think they may come in other model numbers for commercial vs. industrial.


I would not pay any premium for the Fujitsu over the Toshiba. In fact, I'd prefer the Toshiba (assuming it's the same as the Panasonic).


Mark
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,984 Posts
Biodome


The 700 or 600+ figures for the Toshiba and Panasonic are misleading - these are the 'Panel' figures measured before the panel is assembled and its various video boards and screens filters applied.


The figure to look out for on all of the various displays is the 'set' figure - which for the Toshiba/Panasonic is 400cd/m.


If you are in the USA I would look very carefully at the top thread on this forum before you go after a Fujitsu model - I'm not sure if they even allow you to surf the web on there displays; just in case you find out anything interesting about there products!


And surfing any web sites on your new plasma display that gives you info on Fujitsu products probably invalidates your warranty or maybe they will throw that one in at some time in the future and send you a nice wee letter to let you know.


I would put Panasonic, NEC and if its available in the USA the NEW Pioneer PDP-433MXE on your shopping list.


Best regards


Joe
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
165 Posts
Fujitsu is a "star" plasma!

Well, the Fujitsu 4242 is a "state of the art" plasma, with a highest resolution of all 42" plasmas.


You wont miss any details with this one...In "Mars Attacs" (for example) in the begginig you see a star-sky (with many many sttars on it).


Fujitsu with 1024X1024 resolution show them all - on the other way Plasmas like Panasonic chow them all.


Pann Plasma have a great deep black. Panasonic ingenieurs put some "black stripes" all over their pixels so it doeas look very deep black, but this was made on cost of details, witch has been covered as well.


Fact to consider: Panasonic is much cheaper that Fujitsu (4242).


J.B.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,327 Posts
Welcome back Josh!

The deeper blacks from the panny are due to what they call 'Advanced Plasma Adaptive Brightness Intensifier' . Something to do with increasing the discharge cycle - whatever that means. Suffice it to say that it is nothing to do with the "black stripes" you keep mentioning.

Anyway, glad to see you posting more reasonably.


If possible, could you summarize, in English, some of the plasma reviews in your German home cinema magazine. Particularly any parts where they mention what they like better about the picture of a plasma display over another.


Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,172 Posts
The basic ALiS glass is more than 2 years old, hardly state of the art glass. The electronics Fujitsu uses are probably state of the art. But let's stop jibber jabbering that the 4242 is state of the art given the advances in glass over the past 2 years.


MArk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
165 Posts
For those who intersted....


There are many reviews of Plasmas over Internet.

And allmost every single one is different.


This is just another one....


It from german magazine called "Video" - it´s the biggiest german and europian (by sold copies) Video/TV/DVD etc. test magazine.


They have two categories of Plasma tests - Plasma TV and Monitor Plasma.


TV Plasma (6 at all) have rates as following:

Picture (max 50 points)

Panasonic TH-50 PHW3 and TH-42 PW3 have for PQ 42 points. (Test Sep/01)

All other tv plasmas were tested before Dez/99 - not interesting for comparsion.


Plasma Monitors:

PQ max 60 (not 50 like above) points


Best PQ:

46 points:

NEC PX-42 VM 3G and

SONY PFM-42 B1


45 Points for PQ:

Deawoo DSP-4210GM

Toshiba 42WP16


44 Points for PQ:

Panasonic TH-42 PW4


43 - None


42 Points for PQ:

NEC PX-42 M2A (Jan/99)


The quote of mine in artikle above this one - about "Mars attacks" and the star-sky was in a fact borrowed from this Magazine.


It was a test of a Sony PFM-42 B1 (with same screen as Fujitsu) compared with a Panasonic Plasma. (I just change it a little bit...it was not Fujitsu - it was a SONY ok...):p


Well, to translate the whole artikle it may be a little bit to much for me...

I do understand every single word in English, but translating and writing it´s not what I do at best.


Conclussion....


Why????? Yes way here in Europe Panasonic does not rule the plasma world????


Simple explenation:

Plasma has been tested with DVD and Video Source (DV) - in PAL of course.


NTSC needs only 480 viewable lines of resolution. PAL or DVD need a little bit more than that - 575 lines.


What 852x480 screens can show - it´s simply not enough.

Details are lost and not matter how good the video Qual. is, original resolution will allways be forwared (and not soemthing "like a" or "compressed but still looks good as"...)


In awaiting of a BlueRay Disc and in capatibilities of HDTV 852x480 screens are only good if they are, well...just cheap.


Oferlaor: PAL Plus is not anamorph! It has incrased resolution becose it use the black lines (over and under the pic) for addition pic. information - lines.


divvy: if you realy saw how the pixels look like in a Panny (red pixels are double smaller than blue and green one - asymmetrical order) and big (really big - almost one third of a pixel) black stripes over the pixels you wouldnt belive that "APABI" is a main course of Panny blackness....


J.B.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,327 Posts
Very interesting Josh. So the PAL rez prolly has a lot to do with how 480p plasmas perform vs. 1024 ALiS. I wonder if Mark Taylor, Ofer, Joe F, and the other PAL users can comment.


I hope you will respect the views of the others here when they say they prefer the 480p screens to ALiS. It does not mean that they are panasonic dealers or that they simply want the cheapest panel. It simply means that they see something different to you and some of the reviewers. I suspect that Fujitsu will discontinue the ALiS panels in favor of 1024X768 panels to compete with NEC and Pio. I may be wrong. We shall see.


Reagarding the panny; the asymetric cell structure is supposed to "achieve both high brightness and high color temperature, resulting in a significantly improved light-emitting balance of the three primary colors (red, green, blue)". (quote from their spec sheet - wow I could be a dealer!) so again I think you are mixing up "features" here.


It is interesting that the review scores you posted put the Sony panel at the top. Even the owners of that panel here on this forum are well aware of its limitations for DVD etc., but do rave about the HD image. Do the reviews mention false contouring at all? This is the inability of some plasmas to produce sufficient gray scale to properly graduate across grey to black. This is mentioned as a problem in the Sony panel by a lot of US posters and reviewers. I wonder if the problem is seen in Europe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
Interesting that the supposed plasma tv's and monitors are both in fact the consumer pw3/4 and not pwd for the supposed latter testee!

Also that the 4 model scores less (44-60) relative to its previous 3 counterpart (42-50)! A meaningless 'test' from what I suspect has either been translated wrong or is from yet another unreliable magazine as most tend to be of late, internationaly so it would appear.

The proof being in the pudding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,238 Posts
I have seen the Daewoo and the Panasonic. The Daewoo has better picture qulity than the Panny????? No way. Completley discredits the review IMHO.


You could put 3 feet of mddy water between you and the Panny and it would still look better than the Daewoo. Quoted 500:1 contrast ratio and I believe it. I have also seen the Sony, 1.5 feet of muddy water. IMHO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,172 Posts
Yeah. I can't imagine the agenda of the magazine nor its testing methodology (if they lack an agenda). Rare in opinions to say this: But there conclusions are just flat-out wrong.


There is no reason to pay attention to what they had to say, nor should any buyer consider it.


Mark
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,327 Posts
Encaser, IUnknown and Rogo. You are all correct of course. I just did not want to reply to Josh in the same way that I did with my first ever reply to him which was we can safely disregard said review as useless.

Oh well, I tried.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
391 Posts
I read all these reviews too and IMHO they are all trash even from more reputable magazines than "Video". (BTW: accord. to Image Home Entertainment Pana 42 is the reference plasma). I do not think they have any agenda they just lack the knowledge, resources and dedication like in many PC magazines too.


But one thing unsettles my mind. I have still to see ONE single Pana 42 with a satisfying picture. Really all of them were worse than the other plasmas beneath them. Is there maybe a real problem with Panny and PAL ?
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top