RPTV sales up in latest reports, plasma falls again to LCD
It was around this time last year when we saw RPTV sales hit an unexpected jump, but honestly, we wouldn't read too much into it. Manufacturers are bailing from the aging technology left and right, and even though sales were up 27-percent in October over September (tallying "the highest unit sales since May"), these figures are still "less than half" of what was seen in January. Additionally, 1080p LCDs outsold 1080p plasmas in the 50- to 54-inch arena "by nearly three to one," and research from Pacific Media Associates also discovered that LCDs "made up 80-percent of flat panels sold" in the 26-inches or larger category. Also of note, street prices sunk around 30-percent from the same month a year ago, and while Samsung led the flat-panel market with a nearly 20-percent share, Toshiba's 32-inch 32HL67 was said to be the best seller.[Image courtesy of NFM]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Galley @ Dec 17th 2007 8:45AM
Two of my friends own 50" 1080p rear-projection LCDs. At the time, they were the best bang-for-the-buck.
Adelmad @ Dec 17th 2007 11:26AM
RPTV is still a good bet for larger screen sizes.
I have 60" RPTV from Sony. 1080p, PQ is terrific and total cost was less than $2K.
Shape @ Dec 17th 2007 12:11PM
RPTVs still are the best bang for the buck. I just bought a Sony KDS-60A3000 60" SXRD RPTV for $1650 from Circuit City. Let me know when I can get a 60" plasma or LCD with the A3000's incredible picture quality for that price.
rip @ Dec 17th 2007 2:03PM
I suspect rptv has some life in it. Consider all the people that will quickly realize that 32" or 40" flat panel is ridiculously small for a typical living room. Especially for 1080p.
And I have to say that I understand why LCD is popular. I was one of the consumers that preferred it over plasma. Until I saw the Pioneer Kuro line. It really is the new standard. My Samsung lcd, which I thought was great (and highly rated by reviewers) now looks pretty weak by comparison.
David @ Dec 17th 2007 2:11PM
The Sony KDS-60A3000 has the best picture out there and it costs half as much as LCD or Plasma. It is selling for around $1900 at circuit city the last time I checked. How did you get it for $1650?
LCD = Generally not that good with fast action sequences and camera pans. Also, even the best Sony XBR models have ghosting around the text whenever text comes on the screen. Not as impressive as plasma when it comes to picture quality.
Plasma = Even the top models have inaccurate green primary color production. Image retention and possible burn in issues. Uses more power. I find them to have more noise (grainy) compared to the xxA3000.
DLP = Not quite as good of color reproduction compared to the Sony SXRD xxA3000 line, but can be pretty good nonetheless. Faster refresh than LCD. Grainy. Uses a trick to get 1080p, not native 1080p resolution from what I gather. Rainbow effects, except on the ones that have LED backlighting.
The 60A3000, as with any RPTV, has viewing angle deficiencies and also is about 18 inches deep compared to the 4 inches of a Plasma or LCD. It also requires a bulb change every three years or so. Other than that, it is the best deal out there.
Shape @ Dec 17th 2007 3:00PM
"The Sony KDS-60A3000 has the best picture out there and it costs half as much as LCD or Plasma. It is selling for around $1900 at circuit city the last time I checked. How did you get it for $1650?"
It was $1850 a few weeks ago, and I had a Circuit City 10% off coupon from AAA. http://www.aaa.com/circuitcity
Loban @ Dec 17th 2007 2:22PM
I'll keep my mouth shut on this issue as I tend to get pretty worked up when discussing the facts and myths of each technology. Let me just say this: Plasma > LCD >>>>>>>>> RPTV
Shape @ Dec 17th 2007 3:01PM
"I'll keep my mouth shut on this issue as I tend to get pretty worked up when discussing the facts and myths of each technology. Let me just say this: Plasma > LCD >>>>>>>>> RPTV"
In terms of price, you are absolutely correct.
David @ Dec 17th 2007 3:42PM
You need to sit in front of a 60A3000 with a good 1080p source. Then check out that same source with the LCDs and Plasmas costing $1000+ more. It blows them away.
Loban @ Dec 17th 2007 5:26PM
If someone twisted my arm and made me buy an RPTV, it would most definitely be a Bravia. But I cannot tolerate the inferior viewing angles and uneven wishy washy brightness of an RPTV.
Sit that Sony 60A3000 next to a Pioneer KURO PDP-6010FD and then we'll talk. It'll look just as good as the Bravia and the picture won't disappear or fade if you're not lucky enough to grab the seat right in front of it for the Superbowl.
Yes, I realize the Pioneer is more expensive, but like the old saying goes: You get what you pay for.
David @ Dec 17th 2007 6:26PM
$1800 vs $4000, and the plasma will have inaccurate green primary color and a bit more graininess. I agree about the viewing angle, as the sweet spot on the A3000 seems to be about 30 degrees horizontal each way from center. But even off to the side the picture is good, just a little dimmer.
Shape @ Dec 17th 2007 6:36PM
Funny you should mention the Kuro. CNet rated the A3000 second only to the Pioneer Kuro. Check out the "top rated products" column:
http://reviews.cnet.com/televisions/?tag=glnav
And yeah, for an MSRP of $6500 or $7500 for the 60" Elite, it had *better* be a lot better than the $2199 MSRP A3000. The Kuro is more than 3 times the price! And it is about 4 times more expensive than what I paid for my 60" A3000. Good luck finding a Kuro on sale, too.
Is it 4 times better than the A3000? Not according to my wallet.
Loban @ Dec 17th 2007 8:08PM
Well God bless you for being able to stand watching an RPTV. I'm sure you're very happy with them and if your first HDTV is an RPTV you'll never know the difference anyway I suppose. There are a lot of people who loves their Corvettes and wouldn't trade them for anything having never had the chance to drive a Porsche.
Shape @ Dec 17th 2007 9:12PM
Wow, "being able to stand" to watch an RPTV. What flame bait.
Yeah, sure is hard to watch this:
http://flickr.com/photos/shapegsx/2053529285/
And this:
http://flickr.com/photos/shapegsx/2045171485/
And no, it is not my first HDTV. It is actually my 2nd.
If I could afford a Kuro and not feel the strain of spending $6500, I'd have one in my house right now. A friend of mine actually does have a Kuro. It is a gorgeous TV. But frankly, the A3000 is gorgeous, too.
For a 60" TV under $2000, there is no better TV than the A3000. None. Hell, I'd even extend that to $3000 and maybe even $4000.
CNet seems to love the TV, too:
reviews.cnet.com/projection-tvs/sony-kds-55a3000/4505-6484_7-32468848.html
They loved the Kuro, too, but it wasn't nearly as color accurate as the A3000, with an off green primary color:
http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/pioneer-kuro-pdp-5080/4505-6482_7-32476901.html?tag
The Kuro is also more power hungry at a staggering 532W for the 1080p 60" version vs 220W for the 1080p A3000 (all sizes the same), and the RPTV has no threat of burn-in.
With the way TV technology is progressing these days, I wouldn't want to spend more than $2000 on a TV. For me, it makes it a lot easier to upgrade down the road. Mark my words that there will be a TV in 4 years time that would make the Kuro jealous, and at a fraction of the price, too.
longhairbilly @ Dec 17th 2007 9:01PM
Have a Kuro elite and am MORE then happy with it.
Loban @ Dec 18th 2007 12:08AM
It's not flame bait, it's just my opinion. I can't stand to watch an RPTV, i'm just being honest. Now that you've supplied pics of the Sony, and they look alright, why don't you take some off to the side, or perhaps just slightly off the ideal vertical viewing angle. RPTVs just look wishy washy to me. The picture is weak, uneven, and just not real. Plasma is just a strong, bright, powerful picture and as close to CRT as you can get these days. The plasma picture is bright, even, and looks EXACTLY the same no matter where you stand in the room. The light in a plasma is created by the screen itself, not projected onto a screen so it just looks more tangible.
Loban @ Dec 18th 2007 9:46AM
So you're telling me that you're basing your purchase decision on the fact that you'd like to be able to upgrade every 4 years. So instead of spending $5000 on a good TV now that will last you for 10 years or more, you'd rather spend $4000 every 4 years on an inferior technology.
And you're also telling me that you're shying away from plasma based on myths that have been proven again and again to be false (burn-in) for modern day plasmas.
I'll agree with you that for the price, you can't beat RPTV. And that is it's ONLY advantage over other technologies. Literally the ONLY one. But if i'm going to be buying something that essential to my home theater experience, I have no problem paying more to get the set I want. I simply cannot stand the atrocious viewing angle and uneven brightness (even at an ideal viewing angle) of an RPTV and that is the single reason why I didn't even consider one. Even when viewing straight on, the picture of an RPTV still looks artificial to me.
The weaknesses of plasma are not noticeable by anyone but the most discerning videophiles and test equipment (inaccurate green, temporary image retention). The weaknesses of RPTV are noticeable by anyone with eyes over the age of 9 (horrible viewing angle, uneven image brightness).
Shape @ Dec 18th 2007 10:13AM
Who spent $4000? I spent $1650 on my 60" TV. And yeah, I'd rather spend $1650 on an absolutely gorgeous, best-in-class TV now, sell the TV in 4 to 5 years and then buy a new TV with the latest technology than spend $6500 on a TV now that won't hold a candle to a cheaper TV that comes out in 5 years. Jeez, what a run-on sentence. :)
A gorgeous 60" 1080p TV for $1650 is an absolute bargain.
People who bought a 70" $13,000 Qualia 006 in 2005 probably aren't feeling too good about their purchase right about now. Technology in this space has been moving so damn fast, and it isn't slowing down.
Listen, I'm not dogging anyone that bought a Kuro. Like I said before, I have a friend that did. He loves his TV. Hell, I love that TV! I just couldn't spend that kind of money in a space where technology moves so fast. So, for right now, RPTV is for me. In 5 years, we could have a completely different display technology available that surpasses plasma, LCD, RPTV, everything. I'm not loyal to any particular display tech. That would be stupid. I just wanted a great quality, cheap, very large display. That means RPTV right now.
The fact that the TV only weighs 90lbs and uses less than half the power (220W vs 532W!) of an equivalent size plasma are pluses. The viewing angle (not much of an issue for my room), depth (again, not an issue for me), and black levels were compromises. The price was definitely not a compromise! :) That compromise is all the Kuro's.
Loban @ Dec 18th 2007 10:28AM
Oops, I meant $2000 every 4 years. Sorry.
I understand your points. I'm really not a jerk, I just sound like one sometimes. These are just my opinions, I don't mean to say that RPTV is useless, it's just useless to me. The viewing angle is really the killer for me and the overall look of the picture is just strange to me. If I could, I would buy a 60" CRT, but I can't, so Plasma is the closest you can get.
I guess it's just a matter of priority. You have picture, price, features, etc. I place Picture first, then price, then features. You obviously place price first and there's nothing wrong with that, I just can't do it.
And plasmas today are a different animal from 5 years ago. They won't look as outdated 5 years from now as those from 5 years ago look today. When CRTs really hit their stride, one from 1997 looked as good as one from 2007. Technology eventually hits a plateau where the difference in picture for any given technology mostly levels out and each year it only gets negligibly better. That is until a new technology comes along like OLED or SED or something.
Oh, and just FYI, I only spent $2000 on my plasma. It's a 50" Panasonic. I have a friend who only spent $1000 more on a 65" DLP. If I could get over my hatred of the picture on a DLP, I would have obviously bought one as an RPTV is obviously a much better value. But I just can't do it. For some, there is one weakness of any technology that keeps you from investing in it. For plasma, it's weakness is price, but it's something I can deal with because I just can't bring myself to buy an RPTV, I would feel shortchanged the entire time I owned it, like if I'd have just spent a little more or maybe even gotten a smaller size, I could own the best of the best, a plasma. And that's exactly what I did.
David @ Dec 19th 2007 3:19PM
The xxA3000 is not a DLP, it is an SXRD. Different beast.
Tyrone Biggums @ Dec 20th 2007 4:35PM
We are moving into a new house, and I'm shopping for HDTVs for the family room and the master bedroom. For family, I'm likely getting a 61" Samsung DLP- reviews are fantastic and the set is cheap.
In the bedroom, we will be tilting the TV often from side to side, so we want a ~50" flat panel on a TV stand. I know LCD is getting really popular, but I watch a ton of sports, and don't want motion blur issues. That is why I'm leaning towards plasma. Unfortunately, LCDs are much easier to find.
Ethan @ Feb 21st 2008 3:58PM
I am about ready to get rid of my T.V. for good. With this DTV 2009 switch happening, and all that I watch is the news anyways, I'm going to chuck my T.V., and buy me a Blackberry instead.