Ahh, I completely forgot about viewing angle. This is the other area where plasma blows LCD out of the water. My PZ85 looks just as amazing from nearly 180° as it does from dead on. It really is sad... the better mass-market technology seldom wins. Normally, the differences between frontrunner and underdog aren't as significant as those I've seen between LCD and plasma.
The hoops LCD makers jump through to improve the picture (120/240 Hz, variable LED backlighting, etc.) are used as sales tools to make for more impressive looking specs, but really they're absolutely necessary to produce an image comparable to the simpler plasma panel. I could justify LCD's dominance if plasma were that much more expensive, but it isn't anymore. I got my 50" PZ85 for (USD $)1,620 at Sears of all places.
It's definitely a risky move; putting the Kuro name on an LCD panel. Anyone expecting an LCD Kuro to measure up to its plasma predecessors is in for a metric assload of disappointment.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
macserv @ Sep 22nd 2008 7:46PM
Ahh, I completely forgot about viewing angle. This is the other area where plasma blows LCD out of the water. My PZ85 looks just as amazing from nearly 180° as it does from dead on. It really is sad... the better mass-market technology seldom wins. Normally, the differences between frontrunner and underdog aren't as significant as those I've seen between LCD and plasma.
The hoops LCD makers jump through to improve the picture (120/240 Hz, variable LED backlighting, etc.) are used as sales tools to make for more impressive looking specs, but really they're absolutely necessary to produce an image comparable to the simpler plasma panel. I could justify LCD's dominance if plasma were that much more expensive, but it isn't anymore. I got my 50" PZ85 for (USD $)1,620 at Sears of all places.
It's definitely a risky move; putting the Kuro name on an LCD panel. Anyone expecting an LCD Kuro to measure up to its plasma predecessors is in for a metric assload of disappointment.