Author Topic: Plasma vs LCD ? (Read 279112 times)

babed95 · « **Reply #1200 on:** Nov 29, 2009 at 07:40 PM »

plasma, plasma, plasma! heheheheh

barrister · « **Reply #1201 on:** Nov 30, 2009 at 10:11 AM »

Quote from: eoman on Nov 28, 2009 at 04:13 PM

Plasma Users
* is burn-in or image retention still an issue on 2009 plasma models??
* is it really required to do an initial burn-in for 100hrs? and after that does it mean that I won't be experience any image retention anymore?

Burn-in is not an issue. But image retention is still an issue.
Break-in is not required, but it's recommended.
Break-in does not affect image retention, but break-in reduces the likelihood of burn-in.
(you must know the difference between burn-in and image retention to understand the above principles)

Quote from: eoman on Nov 28, 2009 at 04:13 PM

LCD Users
* is back light bleeding were in there are uneven bright spots across the screen a big issue? I mean does it really hunt all of LCD tvs and are there no LCD tvs that is safe from it?

All LCDs are affected by screen uniformity issues.
Uniformity problems are most noticeable when viewing dark scenes in a dark room.

eoman · « **Reply #1202 on:** Nov 30, 2009 at 12:13 PM »

Quote from: barrister on Nov 30, 2009 at 10:11 AM

Burn-in is not an issue. But image retention is still an issue.
Break-in is not required, but it's recommended.
Break-in does not affect image retention, but break-in reduces the likelihood of burn-in.
(you must know the difference between burn-in and image retention to understand the above principles)

All LCDs are affected by screen uniformity issues.
Uniformity problems are most noticeable when viewing dark scenes in a dark room.

Thanks on this one I thought that the 100hrs procedure is called burn-in so it's called break-in pala..

One more question.. The Burn-In is the one that goes permanent on plasmas right? and Image Retentions are the one that can be removed by washing away?

Got messed up on some articles online saying Burn-In or Image Retention so I thought they're just the same.

Thanks

barrister · « **Reply #1203 on:** Dec 01, 2009 at 12:42 AM »

Quote from: eoman on Nov 30, 2009 at 12:13 PM

One more question.. The Burn-In is the one that goes permanent on plasmas right? and Image Retentions are the one that can be removed by washing away?

Got messed up on some articles online saying Burn-In or Image Retention so I thought they're just the same.

Actually, those two terms really have no "official" definition yet. In my case, I just use those terms as they are most commonly used in forums. They are relatively new terms, so I guess their definitions are still evolving.

Yes, you're right --- burn-in is permanent; image retention (IR) is temporary.

And here are the reasons for the distinction:

Burn-in results from uneven phosphor aging. Phosphors age fastest during the first 100 hours of use. Observing a break-in procedure during that time will help ensure that the phosphors burn more evenly. However, newer phosphor formulations have made phosphors virtually burn-proof, making break-in procedures practically unnecessary.

On the other hand, IR results from a residual charge in the plasma cell that goes away after the charge in all cells eventually equalize. IR has nothing to do with phosphors, so it's unlikely that a break-in procedure would help reduce a panel's tendency to produce IR.

Here's how the Plasma Display Coalition describes IR:

From this test, image retention appears not to be caused by phosphor burn-in. Rather, it appears to be an accumulated electrical charge within pixel walls. A full white image was displayed for a few hours on the two plasma TVs that showed residual images, after which the residual images disappeared completely. Had the phosphors aged sufficiently, this procedure would not have been enough to clear up the problem.

This points to the possibility of a residual electrical charge accumulating within the individual pixel walls, much like a capacitor. The all-white test pattern apparently cleared this charge.

http://www.plasmadisplaycoalition.org/results/image.php

bachwitz · « **Reply #1204 on:** Dec 07, 2009 at 05:25 PM »

re-Posting per member AV_Phile

"Power consumption is a major consideration with all things equal. Price is another. And all those things we considered inferior before in an LCD have been overcome with today's models, so that in terms of color saturation, motion blur and black levels, both are on equal footing. It then becomes clear that in general, LCDs have the price and power saving advantage. LCDs are expected to bring that to screens 50" and above if they haven't already.

Plasmas are a newer display technology than LCD that is inherently superior but somehow lost to LCD in winning markets. LCD was able to capitalize on its earlier weaknesses by addressing them making them marketing tools instead. In the meantime, Plasma's weakness like phospor burn in, operating heat and high power consumption were never addressed until it was too late. Had they been able to address these, the outcome could have been very different. Their makers seems too confident that a superior display is everything. They were evntually proven wrong when LCDs caught up with their display contrast. response times and brightness at cheaper prices and more eco-friendly terms. While Plasmas remained as they have been complete with all their weaknesses unaddressed.

There are now only three makers of Plasma panels - Samsung, LG and Panasonic, and they're all struggling to keep the Plasma interest alive with excellent models in the 50" and above TV. But this can soon be overtaken with cheaper and more eco-friendly LED LCDs coming out next year. I am of the opnion that LED LCDs just nailed the coffin on Plasmas. But I have no problem with both technologies co-existing. There are already plasma models that have made excellent strides in their former weaknesses. I'm just not confident they'll survive any farther the LCD onslaught. It's a case of too little too late. It's not as if it can still win when the LCD already has cornered majority of the market for fixed panel displays."

http://www.pinoydvd.com/index.php?topic=105738.0

Munskie · « **Reply #1205 on:** Dec 11, 2009 at 08:28 AM »

Entering Robinsons Appliance Store in Marquee Mall in Pampanga.....and instantly approached by a salesman...

Me: Meron kayo Panasonic Plasma?

Salesman: Wala na Sir, phaseout na kasi PLasma, puro LCD po andito.

Me: Meron pa eh, di lang kayo nagdadala.

Salesman: Mas maganda po mga LCD, mas maganda ang video.

Me: Di rin eh (never bothered to explain)

Salesman:

cHess · « **Reply #1206 on:** Dec 11, 2009 at 08:58 AM »

Based on my eyes,,,wala pa rin tatalo sa Plasma pagdating sa cable and movie viewing.
pq of plasma for movie viewing is still the best!
LCD pq is best for gaming. Animation. Very vibrant and colors pag na setup ng maganda.

frootloops · « **Reply #1207 on:** Dec 11, 2009 at 10:56 PM »

Definitely Plasma pero I bought an LCD.... mura kasi eh...

anya618 · « **Reply #1208 on:** Dec 11, 2009 at 11:02 PM »

question mga sir: kung 80% for cable and movie viewing, and 20% for gaming - advisable bang plasma pa din ang kunin?

frequenzy · « **Reply #1209 on:** Dec 11, 2009 at 11:47 PM »

sa kin ang rule ko is
TV/MOVIES --> Plasma
LCD --> Games

pero plasma pa din kinuha ko kahit pang ps3 lang :-)

Carlo777 · « **Reply #1210 on:** Dec 12, 2009 at 12:02 AM »

Quote from: anya618 on Dec 11, 2009 at 11:02 PM

question mga sir: kung 80% for cable and movie viewing, and 20% for gaming - advisable bang plasma pa din ang kunin?

For cable, without a shadow of a doubt...

Plasma!

The soft picture definition of plasma tends to hide the imperfections of our local broadcast, while the brilliance of LCD just exposes them further.

pantellica · « **Reply #1211 on:** Dec 13, 2009 at 06:37 PM »

ako sa lahat ay plasma...tv viewing and games and movies..kase kahit sa games ay nagagandahan pa din ako sa view nya....lalo na sa movies...for me lcd is also good...mas ok nga lang plasma for me.....

but kung gaming lang puro concern ay lcd daw ang best...

ako din madalas kapag may nakakausap na salesman sa mall ay palageng lcd daw ang maganda kumpara sa plasma...never ako nakipag talo...pero may isang naibang salesman ako nakausap...dun sa mOA panasonic place...ok yung salesman...madame alam para syang nag foforum hehe.

both ay good kase mata mo mag dedecide

anya618 · « **Reply #1212 on:** Dec 13, 2009 at 06:47 PM »

Quote from: Carlo777 on Dec 12, 2009 at 12:02 AM

For cable, without a shadow of a doubt...

Plasma!

The soft picture definition of plasma tends to hide the imperfections of our local broadcast, while the brilliance of LCD just exposes them further.

sir me napansin lang ako sa C and S series parang merong isang unit na me reflection? ung isa wala

av_phile1 · « **Reply #1213 on:** Dec 14, 2009 at 09:46 AM »

Quote from: Carlo777 on Dec 12, 2009 at 12:02 AM

For cable, without a shadow of a doubt...

Plasma!

The soft picture definition of plasma tends to hide the imperfections of our local broadcast, while the brilliance of LCD just exposes them further.

I think the temporal dithering in plasma effectively doubles pixel count to make it more forgiving of low resolution sources which makes ordinary cable tv viewing better compared with LCDs. I used to recommend plasma for cable TV viewing at 32 inches. But there are so few plasmas at those sizes these days.

ayosbathere · « **Reply #1214 on:** Dec 15, 2009 at 10:00 AM »

well... mukhang majority is plasma for movie & SD/TV. LCD for gaming

share ko lang experience ko.. kung bakit LCD ako bumagsak.

first - 9feet away yong seat to watch cable (25%) & movies (75% for BD & DVD upscaling) and
2nd - I plan to buy 50" up which I really like..
-- well parang mali diba.. 9feet away with 50"up parang nakakahilo, masakit sa mata at aantukin ka. (considering my eye vision is 20/20)

Plasma:for plasma target ko talaga yong Toshiba and Pana. well hindi na meet ng eye viewing ko.. ok malinaw maganda rin color quality (using my own BD - ) but naduduling ako at parang may kulang. we change the settings.. still not meet my eyes.

LCD: Philips, Sony (w series) & Sharp (77M)
I tested the Philis 47" .. as in ganda talaga that meet my eyes need 9feet away. factory setting lang ok na yong brightness & contras.. as in true color talaga.. but the price ng 47" ang mahal same n ng Sony & sharp 52"

Sharp 52" .. wow medyo mas ok yong brightness & contrass.. the flow ng action (casino royal.. .first part ng chasing..) talaga same nong philips.. medyo na kakahilo pa nga yong philips hehehe.

Sony - need ko pa umatras 6feet more .. simula pa lang hilo na ako... pero ang linaw yong color lang mas yadong matingkad.

well.. my bottomline is depende sa mata, requirements (e.g location) at kung anong brand ma meet needs mo. I'm not saying ok ang LCD.. depende eh. well nong nong nasa bahay na.. cable testing.. kasing linaw ng old philips HD pixel plus TV (not LCD/& not plasma).

pantellica · « **Reply #1215 on:** Dec 18, 2009 at 03:37 PM »

Quote from: ayosbathere on Dec 15, 2009 at 10:00 AM

well... mukhang majority is plasma for movie & SD/TV. LCD for gaming

share ko lang experience ko.. kung bakit LCD ako bumagsak.

first - 9feet away yong seat to watch cable (25%) & movies (75% for BD & DVD upscaling) and
2nd - I plan to buy 50" up which I really like..
-- well parang mali diba.. 9feet away with 50"up parang nakakahilo, masakit sa mata at aantukin ka. (considering my eye vision is 20/20)

Plasma:for plasma target ko talaga yong Toshiba and Pana. well hindi na meet ng eye viewing ko.. ok malinaw maganda rin color quality (using my own BD - ) but naduduling ako at parang may kulang. we change the settings.. still not meet my eyes.

LCD: Philips, Sony (w series) & Sharp (77M)
I tested the Philis 47" .. as in ganda talaga that meet my eyes need 9feet away. factory setting lang ok na yong brightness & contras.. as in true color talaga.. but the price ng 47" ang mahal same n ng Sony & sharp 52"

Sharp 52" .. wow medyo mas ok yong brightness & contrass.. the flow ng action (casino royal.. .first part ng chasing..) talaga same nong philips.. medyo na kakahilo pa nga yong philips hehehe.

Sony - need ko pa umatras 6feet more .. simula pa lang hilo na ako... pero ang linaw yong color lang mas yadong matingkad.

well.. my bottomline is depende sa mata, requirements (e.g location) at kung anong brand ma meet needs mo. I'm not saying ok ang LCD.. depende eh. well nong nong nasa bahay na.. cable testing.. kasing linaw ng old philips HD pixel plus TV (not LCD/& not plasma).

correct..your eyes will decide...and your money will also decide plus...overall its you who will decide..

this topic is very usefull..its fun to read some comments here..base on someone's opinions.

cHess · « **Reply #1216 on:** Dec 18, 2009 at 04:00 PM »

I believe this are based on their actual experience while watching different media in Plasma and LCD.

Iba talaga Plasma pagdating sa movies and even animation ang ganda ng PQ.

Arnel E. · « **Reply #1217 on:** Dec 19, 2009 at 01:22 AM »

If you are looking for PQ that's similar to the cinema in terms of saturation, color balance, sharpness, etc... lamang ang plasma, coz it has the soft and warm flavor to the image. But i don't think it has the resolution of the LCD, so for me, for BluRay and other Full HD sources, LCD beats plasma. I'm not just referring to pixel resolution here, but the actual details in the image. Side-by-side, the plasma looks softened on HD, particularly when there are small texts in the image. PS3 also looks sharper on an LCD.

For image as big as in the cinema, softening and image warmth is necessary. Imagine mo na lang gaano kabilis ka mahihilo sa sine kung naging very sharp and brilliant ang picture! Also, with image that big, details don't get lost by a slight softening, dahil malaki sobra. But for home viewing (except projectors), the image size-to-distance ratio is not normally as big as in the cinema, therefore IMHO if you need the same details as in the cinema, you need an LCD for its superior resolution. But I assume BluRay or other good source material, and not cable TV (which has flaws that are just revealed quite badly by resolution). However, details vs. color is still an endless debate, and boils down to personal taste.

But this is in general, and based only on the LCDs and plasmas I've checked out. There could be exceptions.

ayosbathere · « **Reply #1218 on:** Dec 19, 2009 at 04:44 PM »

Quote from: Arnel Enero on Dec 19, 2009 at 01:22 AM

If you are looking for PQ that's similar to the cinema in terms of saturation, color balance, sharpness, etc... lamang ang plasma, coz it has the soft and warm flavor to the image. But i don't think it has the resolution of the LCD, so for me, for BluRay and other Full HD sources, LCD beats plasma. I'm not just referring to pixel resolution here, but the actual details in the image. Side-by-side, the plasma looks softened on HD, particularly when there are small texts in the image. PS3 also looks sharper on an LCD.

For image as big as in the cinema, softening and image warmth is necessary. Imagine mo na lang gaano kabilis ka mahihilo sa sine kung naging very sharp and brilliant ang picture! Also, with image that big, details don't get lost by a slight softening, dahil malaki sobra. But for home viewing (except projectors), the image size-to-distance ratio is not normally as big as in the cinema, therefore IMHO if you need the same details as in the cinema, you need an LCD for its superior resolution. But I assume BluRay or other good source material, and not cable TV (which has flaws that are just revealed quite badly by resolution). However, details vs. color is still an endless debate, and boils down to personal taste.

But this is in general, and based only on the LCDs and plasmas I've checked out. There could be exceptions.

nadali mo... which the exactly i decided to get LCD; that permits my eyes the size-to-distabce ratio and the real details & colors

stickfighter · « **Reply #1219 on:** Dec 20, 2009 at 06:24 AM »

Quote from: Arnel Enero on Dec 19, 2009 at 01:22 AM

If you are looking for PQ that's similar to the cinema in terms of saturation, color balance, sharpness, etc... lamang ang plasma, coz it has the soft and warm flavor to the image. But i don't think it has the resolution of the LCD, so for me, for BluRay and other Full HD sources, LCD beats plasma. I'm not just referring to pixel resolution here, but the actual details in the image. Side-by-side, the plasma looks softened on HD, particularly when there are small texts in the image. PS3 also looks sharper on an LCD.

For image as big as in the cinema, softening and image warmth is necessary. Imagine mo na lang gaano kabilis ka mahihilo sa sine kung naging very sharp and brilliant ang picture! Also, with image that big, details don't get lost by a slight softening, dahil malaki sobra. But for home viewing (except projectors), the image size-to-distance ratio is not normally as big as in the cinema, therefore IMHO if you need the same details as in the cinema, you need an LCD for its superior resolution. But I assume BluRay or other good source material, and not cable TV (which has flaws that are just revealed quite badly by resolution). However, details vs. color is still an endless debate, and boils down to personal taste.

But this is in general, and based only on the LCDs and plasmas I've checked out. There could be exceptions.

Very well said sir.

And what great timing to have read your post. I am going to purchase a unit today and still could not decide which one to get. I am torn between the Sammy 40B530 Full HD 1080p LCD vs the Panny 42C10 720p HD Ready Plasma.

The Panny is cheaper by 10k, which is a substantial consideration. However, I am after the best PQ quality as I watch HD films more than I watch cable.

After reading your post and after consulting the good friends I have here in Pdvd, I am really decided to get the Sammy!

Clondalkin · « **Reply #1220 on:** Dec 20, 2009 at 02:49 PM »

Guys you better check out closely the Panasonic Neo PDPs (as in 1 meter or less distance) and tell us again if you really think it exhibits "less" resolution than a comparable 1080p LCD. My eyes are telling that the level of details are the same. I can even argue that the details on the plasma appear to be more "natural" - not because of the color.

Anyways, I like the plasma for movies or any video content that uses a filmic camera, but I like LCD for TV variety shows.

Now if you are comparing a 720p plasma to a 1080p LCD, ibang usapan yon.

tonetagabaler · « **Reply #1221 on:** Jan 04, 2010 at 10:39 PM »

Compared LG 42LH70 1080p to pana plasma 42c10 720p yesterday side by side at my friend's house.
For PC use definitely the LG won because of resolution advantage.
Using Media Tank playing 720p & 1080p movies, 700mb Divx Avi files, Cable viewing,
we all decided the PANA 42c10 Won. Why?
Picture on LG 42lh70 look very sharp with true motion feature but it strained our eyes.
It's just good for demo. But if youre willing to spend 2 hours for a movie, better to turn it off (true motion).
While on PANA 42c10 everything look soft, smooth, and better frames.
Mas masarap at enjoy manuod sa Plasma.

for me LCD --> PC USE
PLASMA ---> Movies & cable.
Di namin natest gaming (ps3)..

ferdinand · « **Reply #1222 on:** Jan 05, 2010 at 01:40 PM »

Quote from: tonetagabaler on Jan 04, 2010 at 10:39 PM

Compared LG 42LH70 1080p to pana plasma 42c10 720p yesterday side by side at my friend's house.
For PC use definitely the LG won because of resolution advantage.
Using Media Tank playing 720p & 1080p movies, 700mb Divx Avi files, Cable viewing,
we all decided the PANA 42c10 Won. Why?
Picture on LG 42lh70 look very sharp with true motion feature but it strained our eyes.
It's just good for demo. But if youre willing to spend 2 hours for a movie, better to turn it off (true motion).
While on PANA 42c10 everything look soft, smooth, and better frames.
Mas masarap at enjoy manuod sa Plasma.

for me LCD --> PC USE
PLASMA ---> Movies & cable.
Di namin natest gaming (ps3)..

Tama ka dyan sir. ganyan din yung napansin ko sa panasonic plasma ko against sa lg. Ang napansin ko lalo na sa angle. ayan ang advantage ng plasma sa lcd.

mars · « **Reply #1223 on:** Jul 27, 2010 at 09:18 PM »

Quote from: tonetagabaler on Jan 04, 2010 at 10:39 PM

Compared LG 42LH70 1080p to pana plasma 42c10 720p yesterday side by side at my friend's house.
For PC use definitely the LG won because of resolution advantage.
Using Media Tank playing 720p & 1080p movies, 700mb Divx Avi files, Cable viewing,
we all decided the PANA 42c10 Won. Why?
Picture on LG 42lh70 look very sharp with true motion feature but it strained our eyes.
It's just good for demo. But if youre willing to spend 2 hours for a movie, better to turn it off (true motion).
While on PANA 42c10 everything look soft, smooth, and better frames.
Mas masarap at enjoy manuod sa Plasma.

for me LCD --> PC USE
PLASMA ---> Movies & cable.
Di namin natest gaming (ps3)..

Ganda ng timing pag browse ko nito. I just came from a couple of appliance stores to find a replacement for my "old" Sammy 37R81. Both units are on sale here sa Davao. A little downpayment, tapos zero interest installment sa balance. I got quite confused sa specs kaya di muna ako nagdecide. Comparing them:

1) Pana 42c10 has 720p (1080i) similar to my Sammy (so parang walang upgrade) compared to the 1080p full HD ng LG 42lh70.

2) Contrast Ratio of the Panasonic is 2,000,000:1 while sa LG is 100,000:1)

I wasn't able to make a side by side comparison dahil magkaiba ang tindahan, kaya I appreciate advice from those who have both, or have compared them side by side. I use my TV for DVD and BD movies (50%), low resolution quality cable viewing (45%) and ps3 games (5%).

lucid · « **Reply #1224 on:** Jul 27, 2010 at 10:01 PM »

mga chief may tanong ako...
mejo ot pero sa tingin ko kayo pinaka may "k" sumagot nito eh
alin ang pipiliin nyo dito sa dalawa?
same price lang sila

panasonic VIERA TH-P50S10S o LG 47SL90
plasma LED
screen size: 50" 47"
Resolution: 1080 1080
contrast ratio: 2M:1 3M:1

halos lang pagkakaiba, its either plasma lang talaga o led
-sa size ano ba naman yung 3"
-sa contrast ratio naman di mo na ma differentiate 3m sa 2M

sa ngayon 60% in favor ako sa plasma kasi sa viewing angle nya maski na kelangan ko pa i break in

no sa tingin nyo?

ninjababez® · « **Reply #1225 on:** Jul 28, 2010 at 11:34 AM »

Quote from: mars on Jul 27, 2010 at 09:18 PM

Ganda ng timing pag browse ko nito. I just came from a couple of appliance stores to find a replacement for my "old" Sammy 37R81. Both units are on sale here sa Davao. A little downpayment, tapos zero interest installment sa balance. I got quite confused sa specs kaya di muna ako nagdecide. Comparing them:

1) Pana 42c10 has 720p (1080i) similar to my Sammy (so parang walang upgrade) compared to the 1080p full HD ng LG 42lh70.

2) Contrast Ratio of the Panasonic is 2,000,000:1 while sa LG is 100,000:1)

I wasn't able to make a side by side comparison dahil magkaiba ang tindahan, kaya I appreciate advice from those who have both, or have compared them side by side. I use my TV for DVD and BD movies (50%), low resolution quality cable viewing (45%) and ps3 games (5%).

plasma

biased ng konte kasi plasma ang gamit ko.
wala pa akong nakikitang SD content na nagplay ng mas maganda sa plasma, aside fro crt/tube.

Stagea · « **Reply #1226 on:** Jul 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM »

Quote from: lucid on Jul 27, 2010 at 10:01 PM

panasonic VIERA TH-P50S10S o LG 47SL90

For babad viewing sa dining room or living room ng house (yung favorite panooran ng news, sports, soap, game shows, at kung ano ano pang pinapanood in a bright room... or yung TV na iniiwan lang nakasindi the entire day para hindi tunog patay ang kwarto or nilalaruan ng game console), I'd take the 47SL90. Mas matipid sa kuryente, less heat emission, and less panel wear (noticeable for me ang blacklevel rise ng 2009 model Panny Plasmas).

For cinematic viewing sa HT room, or typical bedroom use (low light levels), mas gusto ko yung black levels and softer image ng Plasma. Mas pansin din kasi ang uniformity issues ng LCD sa dark room (though Plasmas also have noticeable weird patterns at times).

lucid · « **Reply #1227 on:** Jul 28, 2010 at 06:17 PM »

salamat man
nakakatawa nahuli mo ko dito

Quote from: Stagea on Jul 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM

For babad viewing sa dining room or living room ng house
or yung TV na iniiwan lang nakasindi the entire day
nilalaruan ng game console

lalo na sa iniiwan nakasindi

cheers!

Stagea · « **Reply #1228 on:** Jul 31, 2010 at 02:04 AM »

You're welcome. Good luck with the purchase.

barrister · « **Reply #1229 on:** Oct 09, 2010 at 10:39 AM »

CNET Editor's Choice 2010 --- Panasonic Plasma and Vizio LED:

Panasonic, Vizio TVs win CNET's Editors' Choice
by David Katzmaier
October 8, 2010 5:34 AM PDT

It's been a while since I've awarded CNET's Editors' Choice to a TV, but today that changes. Based on TV reviews this year, I'm giving the EC to the Panasonic TC-PVT20/25 and the Vizio XVT3SV. Here's why.

Panasonic TC-PVT20/25 series: It's Panasonic's best TV ever, and in terms of picture quality, it's the second-best HDTV of any brand or technology I've ever reviewed (the best still being the Pioneer Elite Kuro from 2008). The VT25 is the only TV to receive a "9" out of 10 score in our Performance subcategory in 2010, with the deepest black levels of any plasma this year and a superb showing in other performance areas, including 3D. At this point I don't expect any 2010 TV to equal or beat that score. ...

... Vizio XVT3SV series: It's Vizio's best TV ever, with the most extensive 3D-free feature set on the market including a QWERTY Bluetooth remote, built-in Wi-Fi, and our favorite implementation of Apps-on-TV so far. But picture quality is what earned the XVT3SV our award. Highlights include color fidelity, the ability to handle bright rooms well, and black levels deep enough to stand among the best. Its LED local dimming technology didn't suffer the kind of uniformity issues we saw on edge-lit models like the Samsung UNC8000, and also avoided some of the problems we saw on its closest full-array competitors, including the LG LX9500 and runner-up LE8500, along with Sony's XBR-HX909. ...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20018554-1.html