AVS Forum Archive 2 - Marantz vs Panasonic vs Fujitsu vs Runco 42" Plasmas

View Full Version : Marantz vs Panasonic vs Fujitsu vs Runco 42" Plasmas

Deathwish238

04-03-06, 05:09 AM

Well I don't know which plasma is best. I'm looking at 42" and 43" Plasmas by Marantz, Panasonic, Fujitsu, and Runco. Price is not a factor.

Panasonic (http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/vModelDetail?storeId=15001&catalogId=13401&itemId=96291&catGroupId=24973&modelNo=TH-42PX60U&surfModel=TH-42PX60U&cacheProgram=11002&cachePartner=7000000000000005702)
Marantz (http://us.marantz.com/Products/483.asp)
Runco (http://www.runco.com/plasma.html)
Fujitsu (http://plasmavision.com/P42xta51us_42specs.htm)

Also if someone could explain why they all have such different contrast ratios and boast such varied number of colors displayed that'ld be helpful.

plazman

04-03-06, 09:11 AM

[QUOTE=Deathwish238]Well I don't know which plasma is best. I'm looking at 42" and 43" Plasmas by Marantz, Panasonic, Fujitsu, and Runco. Price is not a factor.

Panasonic (http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/vModelDetail?storeId=15001&catalogId=13401&itemId=96291&catGroupId=24973&modelNo=TH-42PX60U&surfModel=TH-42PX60U&cacheProgram=11002&cachePartner=7000000000000005702)
Marantz (http://us.marantz.com/Products/483.asp)
Runco (http://www.runco.com/plasma.html)
Fujitsu (http://plasmavision.com/P42xta51us_42specs.htm)

Also if someone could explain why they all have such different contrast ratios and boast such varied number of colors displayed that'ld be helpful.[/QUOTE]
--------------------

As far as I know (and its not a whole lot!), the basic scoop is:

1. Marantz and Runco are essentially rebadged NEC Plasmas - the 42 inch versions are clones of the commercial NEC clones. I am not aware of 43 inch screens from them, but if they do have them, I would guess those would be Pioneer commercial model clones. Both claim to add some additional video processing on top of NEC, but this is the same claim that Bang & Olufsen makes on their rebadged commercial Panasonics. In general there is little or no difference in picture quality since they are using the same electronics and glass.

2. The Fujitsu's are now using Panasonic glass and their own electronics for everything but the 43 inch (which uses Pioneer glass). It is generally claimed that Fujitsu has the best in-built video processors in the industry.

3. Panasonics are well...Panasonics! They make the glass, electronics everything. Supposedly their strength is their glass, and their weakness (if you can call it that) is their video processor. Also, some would claim the aesthetics and general build quality of their 50U/60U consumer line (this is a personal preference of course).

On reputation alone, independent of price, I would venture that the Fujitsus that combine the most highly regarded glass and video processor would be on paper the best set for picture quality.

On the other hand, given that the Panasonic (commercial 8UK) is so much cheaper than any of the other sets, you could match the Pansonic with an external video processor like the Lumagen or DVDO and get native 1:1 pixel mapping for probably the best picture of all at the lowest cost!

If you do end up preferring the Marantz or Runco over the Fujitsu, I would recommend that you also take a look at the NEC 42 XR4. On this forum you will find a lot of rave reviews from satisfied customers. There is also a review from PC Mag which found the set with a black-level 3 times higher than the comparable 42 inch Panasonics!

So that's my case for now....

fletch999

04-03-06, 11:01 AM

Runco and MArantz use the bare glass and have their own electronics. Other than the physical glass, they are NOT the same. Ditto Fujitsu. Dwin and Vidikron do this also.

For me it would be 1. Fujitsu (single box solution) 2. Runco/Vidikron (two box solutions different finishes) 3. There would be no three.

plazman

04-03-06, 12:20 PM

[QUOTE=fletch999]Runco and MArantz use the bare glass and have their own electronics. Other than the physical glass, they are NOT the same. Ditto Fujitsu. Dwin and Vidikron do this also.

For me it would be 1. Fujitsu (single box solution) 2. Runco/Vidikron (two box solutions different finishes) 3. There would be no three.[/QUOTE]
--------------

This may-or-may not be reliable. But here is a source on who makes what:

http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/plasmatvreviews/whomakeswhat.html

I have not had a chance to see the Runco and Marantz sets, but in my comparison on the Bang & Olufsen and Panny commercial sets it was obvious that both electronics and glass were the same. The only difference is the frame and probably a proprietary coating that is applied to the screen to cut glare.

It would be surprising if either the Runco or Marantz sets had significantly different electronic components than their rebadged NEC or Pioneer counterparts. They are probably better calibrated out of the box and some minor enhancements like a special screen coating, special menu options and minor electronics.

Anyway, if money is not a concern perhaps you will be able to audition these sets in a single location to see which works best for you.

I have seen images from owners of ED Panasonic sets that I would die for in any Plasma set, including mine. So, I would not consider the Panny or other sets only if one of my criteria was to have a brand that others would recongnize as expensive. Not an unreasonable thing to do, in fact we choose brands for what they mean, rather than what they do all the time...

Another factor is that the state of electronics changes all the time. A 3K 50 inch Panny today is probably superior (or equivalent) to any 50 inch set by any manufacturer made even 2 years ago, irrespective of price. So, I would be happier upgrading 3 times in the next 6 years, then having the same set for the next 6 years. But if money is not a concern, it does not really matter...

Guess, it's your money to vote with...

plazman

04-03-06, 12:49 PM

Rally

04-03-06, 01:14 PM

Influence

04-03-06, 01:43 PM

At least in the 50" size, here's my rundown:

First Place - latest Fujitsu (with the integrated tuner and speakers). The picture is just so darn natural on these sets. Closest I've seen to my 34XBR960.

Second Place - Pioneer Elite 1130. Oerall excellent picture in PURE mode (some may find it a little flat, but in a dark room you quickly grow to love the look of a properly calibrated display)

Third - Runco with outboard processor/scaler - PQ may be a tiny bit better than the Pioneer in certain areas and the frame on the set is awesome (black brushed aluminum - yummy), but the Runco is just not worth the 2X price difference. Also, connectivity options are very limited for the $$$. The Elite is far easier to calibrate as well, at least for the user. You can get an Elite darn close to a proper ISF calibration on your own without even using a colorimeter (thank you Pioneer for the PURE mode). Also, does anyone know if the current Runco's are using 5G or 6G Pioneer glass (at least the 43 and 50" models)? I can't seem to find that answer. Being as they don't mention the PureColor filter (directly bonded to the one layer of glass) I have a feeling that they may still be using 5G glass.

Fourth - last years Panasonic 50PX500. This did seem to be a very nice set. Not up to the level of the others, but very close (to everything but the Fujitsu).

I have not had the chance to see the 50" Marantz set, nor can I find a 50" NEC XR5A to look at, so I can't put these in here. Also, judging by the first three 60 series Panasonics I've seen so far (two 50's and one 42"), Panasonic does not deserve to sit in this top category in plasmas. Way more grain and color blocking than last years sets. I'd have to bump them down to Tier 2 as far as PQ is concerned. Hopefully, the PX600's will be better than the PX60s. Also, the aesthetics of the PX60 series are nowhere near the others listed here.

tdavis21484

04-03-06, 05:00 PM

I personally don't trust PlasmaTVBuyingGuide.com for anything. They are retailers disguised as an unbiased website. They gave a Fujitsu one of their worst ratings (conveniently, they do not sell Fujitsu.) Even their who makes what section has incorrect information.

plazman

04-03-06, 07:31 PM

[QUOTE=Influence]At least in the 50" size, here's my rundown:

First Place - latest Fujitsu (with the integrated tuner and speakers). The picture is just so darn natural on these sets. Closest I've seen to my 34XBR960.

Second Place - Pioneer Elite 1130. Oerall excellent picture in PURE mode (some may find it a little flat, but in a dark room you quickly grow to love the look of a properly calibrated display)

Third - Runco with outboard processor/scaler - PQ may be a tiny bit better than the Pioneer in certain areas and the frame on the set is awesome (black brushed aluminum - yummy), but the Runco is just not worth the 2X price difference. Also, connectivity options are very limited for the $$$. The Elite is far easier to calibrate as well, at least for the user. You can get an Elite darn close to a proper ISF calibration on your own without even using a colorimeter (thank you Pioneer for the PURE mode). Also, does anyone know if the current Runco's are using 5G or 6G Pioneer glass (at least the 43 and 50" models)? I can't seem to find that answer. Being as they don't mention the PureColor filter (directly bonded to the one layer of glass) I have a feeling that they may still be using 5G glass.

Fourth - last years Panasonic 50PX500. This did seem to be a very nice set. Not up to the level of the others, but very close (to everything but the Fujitsu).

I have not had the chance to see the 50" Marantz set, nor can I find a 50" NEC XR5A to look at, so I can't put these in here. Also, judging by the first three 60 series Panasonics I've seen so far (two 50's and one 42"), Panasonic does not deserve to sit in this top category in plasmas. Way more grain and color blocking than last years sets. I'd have to bump them down to Tier 2 as far as PQ is concerned. Hopefully, the PX600's will be better than the PX60s. Also, the aesthetics of the PX60 series are nowhere near the others listed here.[/QUOTE]
----------------------
So you are saying that Panny went back-wards in terms of PQ with their current version! Also, why would the PQ of the 50U be worse than the 500U when they use the exact same glass and electronics.

Anyway, in my estimation both the Pannys and NEC are very close to the Pioneer Elite as well as the Fujitsu. While I have not directly compared the NEC to the others, the Pannys in my estimate are very close in PQ - even better based on what you want to view.

I think a lot of people 'like' to believe that the Elites are somehow way better than the Panny, but I have never seen an objective review anywhere that compared the two sets and came to that conclusion.

There are basically two Plasma review camps - the Panny lovers and Panny bashers. Going through this forum, it is clear that 99% of folks recommending sets and how they look at reviews are colored by which camp they fall into.

I find very few posts that make objective fact based reasons fpr their opinions. This may not be surprising since people are usually happy with whatever they buy - at whatever price they paid for. Every plasma I have ever bought (3) has out performed what I believed was its potential and the PQ is way better than anything I have seen in any store! So, it's pretty subjective in the end....

Poeple who get the Elite or Fujitsu or even the Bang & Olufsen stuff must believe they are getting a better product, otherwise why would they get it!

I would rate the sets as follows for PQ only (another subjective ranking)

1. Panny 8UK
2. NEC XR 5/ Pio Elite - probably better than Panny PQ depending on what you want to see (sports)
3. Fujitsu - I guess I just haven't been seeing the right sets yet!
4. Consumer Pannys - I don't like the bezel and stand, but picture is still outstanding.

my 2 cents....

plazman

04-03-06, 07:38 PM

[QUOTE=tdavis21484]I personally don't trust PlasmaTVBuyingGuide.com for anything. They are retailers disguised as an unbiased website. They gave a Fujitsu one of their worst ratings (conveniently, they do not sell Fujitsu.) Even their who makes what section has incorrect information.[/QUOTE]
-------------

WHo would you trust?

tdavis21484

04-04-06, 01:16 AM

[QUOTE=plazman]-------------

WHo would you trust?[/QUOTE]

I would trust established magazines like Sound and Vision, I would trust clearly educated users/owners from places like this site (as we all know, it's pretty easy to tell who knows what they're talking about.), and I would trust my own eyes.

cbane

04-04-06, 03:40 AM

[QUOTE=plazman]--------------------

As far as I know (and its not a whole lot!), the basic scoop is:

1. Marantz and Runco are essentially rebadged NEC Plasmas - the 42 inch versions are clones of the commercial NEC clones. I am not aware of 43 inch screens from them, but if they do have them, I would guess those would be Pioneer commercial model clones. Both claim to add some additional video processing on top of NEC, but this is the same claim that Bang & Olufsen makes on their rebadged commercial Panasonics. In general there is little or no difference in picture quality since they are using the same electronics and glass.

2. The Fujitsu's are now using Panasonic glass and their own electronics for everything but the 43 inch (which uses Pioneer glass). It is generally claimed that Fujitsu has the best in-built video processors in the industry.

3. Panasonics are well...Panasonics! They make the glass, electronics everything. Supposedly their strength is their glass, and their weakness (if you can call it that) is their video processor. Also, some would claim the aesthetics and general build quality of their 50U/60U consumer line (this is a personal preference of course).

On reputation alone, independent of price, I would venture that the Fujitsus that combine the most highly regarded glass and video processor would be on paper the best set for picture quality.

On the other hand, given that the Panasonic (commercial 8UK) is so much cheaper than any of the other sets, you could match the Pansonic with an external video processor like the Lumagen or DVDO and get native 1:1 pixel mapping for probably the best picture of all at the lowest cost!

If you do end up preferring the Marantz or Runco over the Fujitsu, I would recommend that you also take a look at the NEC 42 XR4. On this forum you will find a lot of rave reviews from satisfied customers. There is also a review from PC Mag which found the set with a black-level 3 times higher than the comparable 42 inch Panasonics!

So that's my case for now....[/QUOTE]

Not to cause a fight but actually you are incorrect.

Fujitsu uses all of their own glass except for the new 42", which uses the Panny glass. Thus the reason for the res drop to 1024x768 from 1024x1024 and the contrast increase to 3000:1.

Lets try to get our facts straight.

qz8675309

04-04-06, 08:35 AM

tdavis21484

04-04-06, 08:36 AM

[QUOTE=cbane]Not to cause a fight but actually you are incorrect.

Fujitsu uses all of their own glass except for the new 42", which uses the Panny glass. Thus the reason for the res drop to 1024x768 from 1024x1024 and the contrast increase to 3000:1.

Lets try to get our facts straight.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you about the 42" model, but I think some of us around here (myself included) are under the impression that Fujitsu uses FHP for current 55" panels, Panasonic for 42" and 50" models, and Samsung's glass for its 63" plasma panel. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

plazman

04-04-06, 09:22 AM

[QUOTE=tdavis21484]I would trust established magazines like Sound and Vision, I would trust clearly educated users/owners from places like this site (as we all know, it's pretty easy to tell who knows what they're talking about.), and I would trust my own eyes.[/QUOTE]
---------

excellent! Does Sound & Vision have a review of the 8th or 9th series Panny Plasmas? What about cnet.com?

I agree in the educated owners. My own decision for my most recent purchase was based to a 'great' extent on reviews I read on this site. I ended up buying my set unseen. On the other hand, there are folks on this site who are much more technically savvy than the usual buyer (like myself). Example: R. Harnkness has pictures of what movies look like on his older genreation commercial Panny. Honestly, I have yet to seen movies look like that on mine or any other screen. I am also quite sure, if I had purchased the same set, I would probably not have got pictures to look like that! I do want my pictures to look like that, but without expert help, I doubt I can.....

In fact, I didn't see his images much after I got my set, but it got me thinking that the inherent capabilities between the top sets are pretty close and looking at well calibrated sets, irrepsective of the price will result in a totally satisfying image to the user.

Anyway, as an owner of an NEC and Panny sets I am very satisfied with both. I'm sure if I had got the Pioneer I would have felt the same. The Fujitsus, Runco etc. I'm not sure, since they cost way out of my league and I would have definitely had buyers remorse, particularly if I saw the NEC and Panny 8UK costing 1/2 as much! But that's just me....

R Harkness

04-04-06, 10:20 AM

[QUOTE=qz8675309]Actually the only glass that is Fujitsu's is the 55", you must not be a good dealer for Fujitsu[/QUOTE]

Fujitsu has always used their own glass for their 42" HD model, 55" model. As far as the 63" my memory is getting foggy on that one but I think it might be based on Samsung glass.

To anyone: I know Fujitsu was using the Panny glass for their 42" ED model, but have they indeed switched to Panny for the 42" HD model too? On the Fujitsu site I only see Fujitsu-based HD 42" plasmas.

cbane

04-04-06, 02:57 PM

[QUOTE=qz8675309]Actually the only glass that is Fujitsu's is the 55", you must not be a good dealer for Fujitsu[/QUOTE]

Actually I was making a statement about the first reply I quoted in which he stated that the 43" (which doesnt exist) uses Fujitsu glass. I assume he was reffering to the 42" which I am positive uses Panny glass.

I am double checking on the remainder of the product line from the national trainer.

Remember, I am reffering to the new line of Plasmas. I think the post above this one that refers to Sammy on the 63" is correct judging by the contrast ratio.

Deathwish238

04-04-06, 03:04 PM

Thanks for all the replies.

I keep hearing "they use <insert brand here>'s glass". Well why does the glass matter so much that it needs to be declared? Isn't glass...just glass? Or does the glass contain the actual phosphors and what not that produce the image? I don't know enough about plasmas if that isn't apparent.

cbane

04-04-06, 03:10 PM

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f210/coreybane/kl.jpg

Deathwish238

04-04-06, 03:10 PM

Alright so here are two I'm narrowing it down to a bit:
Panasonic TH-42PHD8UK (http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?displayTab=O&storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&itemId=94538&catGroupId=14624&modelNo=TH-42PHD8UK&surfModel=TH-42PHD8UK)
Fujitsu 42" Plasma (http://plasmavision.com/P42xta51us_42specs.htm)

Why no mention of the new Panasonic 42" TH-42PX60U w/ 10,000:1 contrast? I didn't really see anyone recommend it over the 50U, 500U, or 8U...but I thought it has better contrast meaning better picture?

cbane

04-04-06, 03:17 PM

plazman

04-04-06, 04:16 PM

[QUOTE=Deathwish238]Alright so here are two I'm narrowing it down to a bit:
Panasonic TH-42PHD8UK (http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?displayTab=O&storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&itemId=94538&catGroupId=14624&modelNo=TH-42PHD8UK&surfModel=TH-42PHD8UK)
Fujitsu 42" Plasma (http://plasmavision.com/P42xta51us_42specs.htm)

Why no mention of the new Panasonic 42" TH-42PX60U w/ 10,000:1 contrast? I didn't really see anyone recommend it over the 50U, 500U, or 8U...but I thought it has better contrast meaning better picture?[/QUOTE]
---------------

While I have no complaint about the PX60U in terms of PQ. Here is why I prefer the 8UK (commerical) Pannys:

1. Individual input settings
2. Advanced picture settings for better calibration from the remote menu (no need to get into service menu etc).
3. Better build quality (IMHO much better). The materials used for the bezel and stand look much more robust and aesthetically pleasing (again IMHO). I prefer the charcoal look to the silver-black look of the 60U.

I am sure if you fully calibrate the 60U, given it's higher contrast levels, brighter picture and better input connectivity you could potentially have a better picture than on the 8UK. If I were looking to hang the unit on the wall I believe the PX60U would look nice.

In the BB a mile from where I live they have a Fujitsu 42 inch right next to a 42 inch Panny 500U, guess this is the closest I have ever seen A-B comparison of the two sets. I am assuming the Panny may have been calibrated (since I am told the Fujitsus come pre-calibrated), since it was quite obvious to anyone who saw both units that the Panny held it's ground (to put it diplomatically) in the PQ department for all types of content that we saw - HD, SD and DVD. The exact same content was showing in a pretty dark room (this is the Magnolia section where they have the speakers). I also preferred the styling of the panny 500U over the silver bezel of the Fujitsu.

While, you may come to the same conclusion that many here share that the Fujitsu is the best panel, but you will be well served to compare both sets and see if the price difference justifies the picture quality.....for you.....

tdavis21484

04-04-06, 07:18 PM

When we say "glass" it's the pixel grid and all that. Basically the entire thing that displays the image, just not the electronics that tell it what to do. "Plasma Display Panel" would be a more accurate term, I believe.

tdavis21484

04-04-06, 07:20 PM

[QUOTE=cbane]I cant comment here, obviously biased!

Whats the standard warranty on the Panny. I know the Fujitsu is 3yrs Electronics and 3 yrs on the glass.

Also, I here the Panny is hard to get!

Happy hunting,[/QUOTE]

I read a Fujitsu print ad the other day that specified 3 yrs on the general TV and only 1 year on the plasma display element (glass)...

Dominus

04-04-06, 07:57 PM

I agree with the analogy that you are comparing Lexus to Rolls but that aside, I have yet to see ANYTHING compare to a Fujitsu plasma. If I could only convince the little woman to buy one though believe it or not (she would be satsified with a 9" BW Phillips) she was quite convinced she has not seen anything like it.

. . . Fujitsu

plazman

04-04-06, 08:22 PM

[QUOTE=Dominus]I agree with the analogy that you are comparing Lexus to Rolls but that aside, I have yet to see ANYTHING compare to a Fujitsu plasma. If I could only convince the little woman to buy one though believe it or not (she would be satsified with a 9" BW Phillips) she was quite convinced she has not seen anything like it.

. . . Fujitsu[/QUOTE]
-------------

That's until she sees the Panny 8UK....just kidding ;)

Perhaps you could convince her to get the Panny 8....worth a try!

A lexus in the driveway isn't too shabby....many folks who could afford a Rolls still end up with a Lexus!

cbane

04-04-06, 08:41 PM

[QUOTE=tdavis21484]I read a Fujitsu print ad the other day that specified 3 yrs on the general TV and only 1 year on the plasma display element (glass)...[/QUOTE]

True for last years monitor only models. The new HDTV (tuner) models are 3 + 3.

http://www.plasmavision.com/warranty.htm

tdavis21484

04-04-06, 09:06 PM

[QUOTE=cbane]True for last years monitor only models. The new HDTV (tuner) models are 3 + 3.

http://www.plasmavision.com/warranty.htm[/QUOTE]

Cool, thank you.

sbarrett

08-04-06, 12:26 PM

Great thread. I've been considering each of these sets myself. From a value perspective, and there appears to me to be an ~ $1k price step between the Panny > Marantz > Fujitsu. All latest-generation 42" HD sets.

I feel I have a good handle on the advantages of the Panny, esp. given the 9UK just released. I think the Lexus analogy is a good one.

What I'm struggling with is whether there is a $1k difference between the Marantz and the Fujitsu? I have seen the Panny and Fujitsu, but not the Marantz. My inclination is to go with the Marantz as it seems to be a good price/performance ratio, but haven't

Any reviews, personal experiences or thoughts w/ the Marantz?

Thanks