Panasonic 9th genration commerical

[jmschnur]

When is the TH-50PHD8UK.... going to be updated to the TH-50PHD9UK?

What changes are antiicated?

I really like the cabinet of the TH-50PHD8UK. I do not need speakers in the TV or ASTC in the TV. I have a seperate HDMI switcher. With a HDMI card this model or its next generation would be quite attractive to me.

Joel

[tangfoot]

Recent history has had these models being released in late summer.
There's not even an announcement of it yet, so any features are purely speculative.

Combine the 9th gen panel with the features of the 8UK and you can probably be pretty close.

[Kevin C Brown]

I'll ask here, in that I can't keep up with the volume of threads and posts for the new 60 series consumer units. :)

I have a 37pwd8uk that I really like, and I'd think about moving it to the bedroom to get an HD 42" 9uk for the family room. But ...

Anyone know if the floatings blacks issue is still around for the new 60 series?

[showtz]

I've read about the differences between the 2005 generation of Panny commercial vs consumer and I'm hoping the TH-50PHD9UK will be the plasma for me. I like the ability to customize which inputs I want. Hopefully it has the contrast ratio's of the 60/600 and maybe they will surprise us with true 1080p

[SIZE=2]Can someone tell me if I will be missing any features if I am just using a commercial model Panny as a display and use a input from HD dish reciever? The only thing I can think of is the ability to stretch SD tv.[/SIZE]

[Kevin C Brown]

Supposedly, you can stretch HD *and* SD content with the 60 series. ??

[Jim Hef]

[QUOTE=showtz]...I like the ability to customize which inputs I want....[/QUOTE]
I don't see a problem with the 60u. There's now 2 HDMI and the 2 component inputs, so what more would you like to see? I'm not sure if you need more than one antennae input at your location, but I wouldn't judge these new consumer units for lack of inputs. I would wonder if the "customizing" of the picture is still better with a commercial unit, but that's really only something that a calibrator, or a person wanting their panel professionally calibrated, would worry about.

[cpcat]

[QUOTE=Jim Hef]I would wonder if the "customizing" of the picture is still better with a commercial unit, but that's really only something that a calibrator, or a person wanting their panel professionally calibrated, would worry about.[/QUOTE]

The consumer model is a "plug and play" TV. The commercial is a monitor with much more flexibility and is designed for applications that need it. I think many of us here know how to make use of that flexibility.

[showtz]

"Supposedly, you can stretch HD *and* SD content with the 60 series. ??"

Yes but do the commercial models allow you to zoom and stretch content? (I dont like the way this looks but its a nice feature to have for kids movies or something)

I'm hoping the commercial model will have the same price reduction that the consumer 06 models had compared with last years prices.

[tangfoot]

[QUOTE=showtz]I'm hoping the commercial model will have the same price reduction that the consumer 06 models had compared with last years prices.[/QUOTE]

With the drop in PDPs across the board, they will have to be very aggressive on pricing if they expect to actually sell any of them.

Personally, I wouldn't buy the 8UKs at their street prices today because the 60U is more of a bargain.
I'm not saying the 60U is cheaper, it's just a better feature/dollar value.

And when I look at PDPs such as the HP4260N (MSRP is lower than the current street price of the TH-42PHD8UK), I can't possibly justify buying something with no stand, no speakers and no tuner. The PQ can't POSSIBLY be that much better on the 8UK.
Also note that the HP has PC input and serial control (one of the main reasons I'm looking to the commercial Panny in the first place), and HDMI (which is an add-on to the Panny).

[tomboyter]

I'm with Kevin C. Brown ... I want to know if the PX60/PX600 series still has the "floating blacks", and I would also like to know if they can be adjusted for overscan and horizontal/vertical centering like the commercial panels.

Someone please address these issues?!?!?

Ooooops, I just realized that my post should be in another thread regarding the new consumer models...sorry. However, I would like to say that I am expecting the 9th Gen commercial panels to offer 1080p via HDMI, and possibly an increase in the processing depth to a maximum of 16-bits. Also the "anti-reflective" coating and the same increase in contrast and brightness of the consumer sets. And IF there is a fix for the floating blacks problem, they will have done all that I would ask.

[tangfoot]

[QUOTE=tomboyter]I'm with Kevin C. Brown ... I want to know if the PX60/PX600 series still has the "floating blacks", and I would also like to know if they can be adjusted for overscan and horizontal/vertical centering like the commercial panels.

Someone please address these issues?!?!?[/QUOTE]

Perhaps you should try asking in the appropriate thread.

There is a 60/600 Settings thread that is searchable. The search function is your friend.

[orogogus]

[QUOTE=showtz]I've read about the differences between the 2005 generation of Panny commercial vs consumer and I'm hoping the TH-50PHD9UK will be the plasma for me. I like the ability to customize which inputs I want. Hopefully it has the contrast ratio's of the 60/600 and maybe they will surprise us with true 1080p

[SIZE=2]Can someone tell me if I will be missing any features if I am just using a commercial model Panny as a display and use a input from HD dish reciever? The only thing I can think of is the ability to stretch SD tv.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]

1080p on anything less than 65" commercial panel is wishful thinking this year. Maybe next gear. The announcements (or rather the lack of one) at CES pretty much wrote that in stone. No announcement, no new product this year.

[orogogus]

[QUOTE=tangfoot]With the drop in PDPs across the board, they will have to be very aggressive on pricing if they expect to actually sell any of them.

Personally, I wouldn't buy the 8UKs at their street prices today because the 60U is more of a bargain.
I'm not saying the 60U is cheaper, it's just a better feature/dollar value.

And when I look at PDPs such as the HP4260N (MSRP is lower than the current street price of the TH-42PHD8UK), I can't possibly justify buying something with no stand, no speakers and no tuner. The PQ can't POSSIBLY be that much better on the 8UK.
Also note that the HP has PC input and serial control (one of the main reasons I'm looking to the commercial Panny in the first place), and HDMI (which is an add-on to the Panny).[/QUOTE]

the commercial models (when not vastly overhyped and undersupplied) have always been a bargin relative to the consumer ones. and they should lacking the features you mention (stand, speaker, tuners, some inputs). that being said, for those that find no value in those components, prefer the added flexibility, and/or prefer the aesthetic of the commercial panels (I fall into this category) they make lots of sense even if the price delta is a wash.

[tangfoot]

[QUOTE=orogogus]the commercial models (when not vastly overhyped and undersupplied) have always been a bargin relative to the consumer ones. and they should lacking the features you mention (stand, speaker, tuners, some inputs). that being said, for those that find no value in those components, prefer the added flexibility, and/or prefer the aesthetic of the commercial panels (I fall into this category) they make lots of sense even if the price delta is a wash.[/QUOTE]

So you would pay the identical price for a commercial PDP based solely on its looks?
I like the minimalist look, but I'm not stupid with my money. :p

[Kevin C Brown]

But it isn't just the looks that are different.

[cpcat]

[QUOTE=Kevin C Brown]But it isn't just the looks that are different.[/QUOTE]

Yep. It was hard to convince me when I was a newbie too. My 50U is evidence of that. 65PHD9UK. Now that has a nice ring to it. :)

[orogogus]

[QUOTE=tangfoot]So you would pay the identical price for a commercial PDP based solely on its looks?
I like the minimalist look, but I'm not stupid with my money. :p[/QUOTE]

fortunately I didn't have to make that valuation. ;)

[jmschnur]

I guess we will just have to wait until the 9th generation commercial version hits the street and then do the cost/benefit analysis. The AR coating, overscan, centering are all plusses. The lack of the warranty, HDMI (extra cost) are some of the negatives.

Joel

[Kevin C Brown]

Actually, I wonder if due to the prevalence of HDMI inputs/outputs on A/V products in general, if there's any chance the new pro models would include at least one of them? ;)

Remember in the old days when component inputs were the "new" thing?

[Jim Hef]

[QUOTE=Kevin C Brown]...I wonder if due to the prevalence of HDMI inputs/outputs on A/V products in general, if there's any chance the new pro models would include at least one of them?....[/QUOTE]
I would suspect that the HDMI blade would be the default arrangement, with possibly something else deleted. Possibly, there would be an additional slot to accommodate the standard HDMI??? Where before it was sort of a no-brainer that the commercial version gave a better solution than the consumer version, is this no longer true? I haven't read where the new 60u suffered from the same lack of service menu adjustments that the 50u had. Can anyone confirm this???

[Trunorth]

I think folks have got caught up in the 9th Gen consumer and apparently forgot about 1080p. The only significant step up in PDP PQ is 1080p. '07 and '08 1080p will start to gain a footfold and within 3 years 720p will be like ED plasma today.

[D-Nice]

[QUOTE=Trunorth]The only significant step up in PDP PQ is 1080p. [/QUOTE]

I hope you mean that is your opinion because better contrast and black levels are far more significant than 1080p in my book. Most veterans on this forum would agree with me.

[Ein]

It's all relative.

In my opinion. ;)

1080P is significant. You are getting almost twice the pixels.

Contrast and black level will only be slight improvement from its current level. Unless they managed to turn on and off a plasma cell instantly without pre-charging. Then you will get true black.

[D-Nice]

[QUOTE=Ein]It's all relative.

In my opinion. ;)

1080P is significant. You are getting almost twice the pixels.

Contrast and black level will only be slight improvement from its current level. Unless they managed to turn on and off a plasma cell instantly without pre-charging. Then you will get true black.[/QUOTE]

if you say so. You can easily do your 1080p test today. Take your favorite 1080p LCD and put it up against today's best plasmas (Panasonic, Pioneer, Fujitsu, etc.) in a dark room with 10 people. 9 out of those 10 will vote that the plasma has the best picture.

[cpcat]

[QUOTE=Trunorth]I think folks have got caught up in the 9th Gen consumer and apparently forgot about 1080p. The only significant step up in PDP PQ is 1080p. '07 and '08 1080p will start to gain a footfold and within 3 years 720p will be like ED plasma today.[/QUOTE]


Completely untrue.

[Kevin C Brown]

...and within 3 years 720p will be like ED plasma today.

No. You're forgetting the relation between resolution, viewing distance, and display screen size.

A rough benchmark is that beyond 10 ft, 480p is hard to distinguish from 720p on a 42" screen. 1080p isn't going to change that. :)

[mkoesel]

[QUOTE=orogogus]1080p on anything less than 65" commercial panel is wishful thinking this year. Maybe next gear. The announcements (or rather the lack of one) at CES pretty much wrote that in stone. No announcement, no new product this year.[/QUOTE]

Given that all of the 9th generation consumer sets (not just the 65") have been confirmed to accept 1080p/60, it is not out of the question that the same will hold for the commercial sets. In fact, it seems rather unlikely that only the 65" commercial model would accept 1080p given the similarity in electronics between models of all sizes.

In any case, 1080p/60 will require a new input board. Hopefully they will do a 1080p/60 capable HDMI implementation that is both PC and consumer electronic equipment friendly, and accepts native rate of all models.

[mkoesel]

[QUOTE=Jim Hef]I would suspect that the HDMI blade would be the default arrangement, with possibly something else deleted. Possibly, there would be an additional slot to accommodate the standard HDMI???[/quote]

IMHO, forget the slot. The current fixed-input 15-pin DSUB RGB/Component input should be flat out replaced with an HDMI input instead. And with 1080p/60 capability included. I'm not saying this is what they will do (at least not yet) but its what they ought to do. Its what makes sense.

When these things were conceived nearly a decade ago, PCs didn't have digital output (PCs were/are the primary concern because these were not designed to be home theatre equipment but instead electronic kiosks and boardroom displays). But today's PCs do have digital output -- nearly all of them in fact -- except notebooks where it has just begun to proliferate. However, I would say notebook connectivity is not the primary use for these. And if you need it, you can get the optional 15-pin RGB board. Now given the PC focus, they could perhaps do DVI instead of HDMI, but it is perfectly possible to implement HDMI that is both PC friendly and consumer electronic equipment friendly. So why bother with DVI?

To me this would be a very compelling upgrade, as you'd then have two more digital-capable slots open to allow for 3 total digital inputs. Even better, its probably a good time to remove the limitation of slot three that allows it only to support analog RGB/YPbPr. That would allow for a very ample four digital device connections. And if you wanted to take this even further into fantasy land, we could wish for the fixed HDMI input I just speculated about above to instead just be an input board in a fourth slot. Now you could have four digital, four analog, or whatever combo you want.

Where before it was sort of a no-brainer that the commercial version gave a better solution than the consumer version, is this no longer true?

It still depend on what problem your solution is for. There are still features of the commercial model that do not exist on the consumer model - the biggie being the ability to accept native rate digitally (or native rate at all, on the 60U models).

I haven't read where the new 60u suffered from the same lack of service menu adjustments that the 50u had. Can anyone confirm this???

As far as I have read so far, the consumer model allows overscan adjustment in the horizontal direction only. Or at least that is what has been reported/discovered thus far. There are a lot of queries about this in the 600/60u settings thread, with not many answers.

[Kevin C Brown]

Horiz but not vert? That's strange. :) => But you also reminded me I don't need to keep track of the big long 60 series thread, just the "tweaks" thread for stuff like this.

[ph0sphor]

I really hope they add 1080p/50 support too, as well as native rate support at 50Hz on the digital inputs of all models. I won't buy one unless they do.

[Jim Hef]

[QUOTE=mkoesel]...but it is perfectly possible to implement HDMI that is both PC friendly and consumer electronic equipment friendly. So why bother with DVI?....[/QUOTE]
It's my understanding that TV and computer resolutions via HDMI don't mix. It seems that plasma screen resolutions don't correspond with computer monitor resolutions, and that the signal isn't transferred easily by HDMI for the panel to display it properly. Is this an HDMI problem in their specs??? So, would this mean that DVI is necessary if you replace the RGB blade?

[plazman]

[QUOTE=Jim Hef]It's my understanding that TV and computer resolutions via HDMI don't mix. It seems that plasma screen resolutions don't correspond with computer monitor resolutions, and that the signal isn't transferred easily by HDMI for the panel to display it properly. Is this an HDMI problem in their specs??? So, would this mean that DVI is necessary if you replace the RGB blade?[/QUOTE]
---------------

Technically DVI and HDMI are 'exactly' alike when it comes of video input (AFAIK). But there appears to be more issues about plasma sets resolving HDMI inputs than DVI - at least in the case of Panasonics....

[mkoesel]

[QUOTE=Jim Hef]It's my understanding that TV and computer resolutions via HDMI don't mix. It seems that plasma screen resolutions don't correspond with computer monitor resolutions, and that the signal isn't transferred easily by HDMI for the panel to display it properly. Is this an HDMI problem in their specs??? So, would this mean that DVI is necessary if you replace the RGB blade?[/QUOTE]

While its true that most devices currently on the market don't support computer resolutions over HDMI, there's nothing in the spec that makes this so. It is strictly a limitation of those implementations.

My best guess would be that Panasonic will not worry about updating the DVI blade, but instead they will focus R&D on an HDMI blade that supports PC and consumer electronic signals equally well.

[HDVidGuy]

Any release news on the 9UK?

[orogogus]

[QUOTE=mkoesel]Given that all of the 9th generation consumer sets (not just the 65") have been confirmed to accept 1080p/60, it is not out of the question that the same will hold for the commercial sets. In fact, it seems rather unlikely that only the 65" commercial model would accept 1080p given the similarity in electronics between models of all sizes.

In any case, 1080p/60 will require a new input board. Hopefully they will do a 1080p/60 capable HDMI implementation that is both PC and consumer electronic equipment friendly, and accepts native rate of all models.[/QUOTE]

not 1080p input, 1080p panel resolution. I would be rather surprised if the new panels coming out in fall did not support some flavor of 1080p over their digital inputs given that blu-ray is out by then and panasonic is a strong supporter of that format...

[Plasmusgigantus]

[QUOTE=orogogus]not 1080p input, 1080p panel resolution. I would be rather surprised if the new panels coming out in fall did not support some flavor of 1080p over their digital inputs given that blu-ray is out by then and panasonic is a strong supporter of that format...[/QUOTE]


Agreed! Especially since a couple million kids, teens and adults will have Playstation 3's by the end of the year. Lot's of kids will be asking their parents what 1080p is or, more appropriately, telling their parents what it is. This new Blu-ray install base will push the 1080p plasmas. Guaranteed that Panasonic sees this tidalwave coming.

[mkoesel]

[QUOTE=orogogus]not 1080p input, 1080p panel resolution.[/quote]

Ah, ok, I misunderstood.

I would be rather surprised if the new panels coming out in fall did not support some flavor of 1080p over their digital inputs given that blu-ray is out by then and panasonic is a strong supporter of that format...

Given what has been revealed now (including the manuals), it does not look promising. Its is at least still possible there will be a new blade revealed when the 65" model arrives.

[slksc]

[QUOTE=Plasmusgigantus]Agreed! Especially since a couple million kids, teens and adults will have Playstation 3's by the end of the year. Lot's of kids will be asking their parents what 1080p is or, more appropriately, telling their parents what it is.[/QUOTE]


Remember that we're talking about commercial sets here (at least, that's what I thought this thread was about). IMO, Playstation is irrelevant for the commercial market, and that is the market that Panasonic has designed this set for.

[Felgar]

[QUOTE=mkoesel]IMHO, forget the slot. The current fixed-input 15-pin DSUB RGB/Component input should be flat out replaced with an HDMI input instead. [/quote]
NO! VGA and DVI are the only things that support custom resolutions (incl. native resolution) and non-standard refresh rates (72 hz from PC for instance, which will elimate telecine judder). Just because the input in analog doesn't mean it doesn't work well; in fact once you get 1:1 mapping the VGA signal is essentially perfect. The PC tells the plasma almost the exact color of each pixel; there's no real improvement to be had over that.

[QUOTE=mkoesel]Now given the PC focus, they could perhaps do DVI instead of HDMI, but it is perfectly possible to implement HDMI that is both PC friendly and consumer electronic equipment friendly. So why bother with DVI?[/quote]
Ok, so possibly DVI would be ok. But no HDMI card supports a multitude of resolutions including Panasonic's HDMI cards. While they could be made to according to HDMI specifications, such a solution would certainly not be industry standard. And why would they bother, when the DVI blade is right there and IT does everything one could ask for?

[c627627]

You guys know from the other thread that 9UKs are arriving next week Friday to the distribution center and are shipping out right after that, right?

[assJack1]

[QUOTE=Felgar]NO! VGA and DVI are the only things that support custom resolutions (incl. native resolution) and non-standard refresh rates (72 hz from PC for instance, which will elimate telecine judder). Just because the input in analog doesn't mean it doesn't work well; in fact once you get 1:1 mapping the VGA signal is essentially perfect. The PC tells the plasma almost the exact color of each pixel; there's no real improvement to be had over that.[/QUOTE]

Exactly and well said. For the 8UK 1:1 was achieved using DVI. HDMI 8uk blade couldnt do this. I have a self interest in this because I really want to feed native resolution to the display and I don't use VGA. I wonder if the new 9UK blade (speculating here) will allow 1:1. Hopefully after people complained about the 7k and 8uk blades Panny would make some special changes. I'll be purchasing a DVI right now.

[mkoesel]

[QUOTE=Felgar]NO! VGA and DVI are the only things that support custom resolutions (incl. native resolution) and non-standard refresh rates (72 hz from PC for instance, which will elimate telecine judder).[/quote]

Wow, you seem terribly alarmed. I guess it wasn't clear from my post that I was referring to an HDMI implementation that would allow for many more resolutions than the current one - essentially, one that supports all the resolution the analog RGB inputs do today.

Just because the input in analog doesn't mean it doesn't work well; in fact once you get 1:1 mapping the VGA signal is essentially perfect. The PC tells the plasma almost the exact color of each pixel; there's no real improvement to be had over that.

Its a nice theory, but when it came to my setup, I did notice a marked improvement when switching from the VGA port to the DVI board. YMMV of course, but your implication (as I read it) is that no one will see an improvement. I do and so have others.

Ok, so possibly DVI would be ok. But no HDMI card supports a multitude of resolutions including Panasonic's HDMI cards. While they could be made to according to HDMI specifications, such a solution would certainly not be industry standard. And why would they bother, when the DVI blade is right there and IT does everything one could ask for?

Neither the DVI blade nor the HDMI blade in their current incarnations do everything one could ask for. What I was suggesting is a brand new HDMI blade that would support all desired resolutions (and refresh rates). HDMI makes more sense simply because that is where the industry is going. Sure, they could do DVI too, but I frankly don't see them spending R&D on both, and if they choose one of them its most likely to be HDMI. I don't particularly like the HDMI connector myself but realistically that is the way they will go when they do decide to invest in a new digital board.

As for VGA, its basically a cooked goose. There's nothing wrong with it, no. Works great. But its simply obsolescent. It makes no sense to keep manufacturing these displays with the only built in port being an antiquated one. It makes much more sense to allow those who need this type of input to purchase a board, while having the fixed input (if they insist on having a fixed input at all) be digital.

[mkoesel]

[QUOTE=assJack1]I wonder if the new 9UK blade (speculating here) will allow 1:1.[/QUOTE]

I realize you are speculating, but when it comes to a new 9UK HDMI or DVI blade, its not looking promising. So far there is a new HD SDI blade and new composite blade and that's all she wrote.

Adding to the speculation theme, it seems plausible to me that the 65" 1080p model may usher in a new design for the commercial line (with new features, hopefully).

[Felgar]

[QUOTE=mkoesel]Its a nice theory, but when it came to my setup, I did notice a marked improvement when switching from the VGA port to the DVI board. YMMV of course, but your implication (as I read it) is that no one will see an improvement. I do and so have others.[/quote]
MMHV (my mileage has varied)... Did you get 1:1 for sure? (just outputting 1368x768 won't do it) And did you have an adequate cable?

[QUOTE=mkoesel]Neither the DVI blade nor the HDMI blade in their current incarnations do everything one could ask for. What I was suggesting is a brand new HDMI blade that would support all desired resolutions (and refresh rates). [/QUOTE]
What doesn't the DVI blade do? Yeah, but industry standard is to use HDMI for typical TV resolutions, so all I'm saying is that Panasonic figured they may as well go with that approach and use DVI for something with more flexibility.

[tunnelight06]

Would it make any sense to buy a monitor instead of a TV when I have no plans on using this for anything else but our television set?

Is PQ any better with the monitors than with the TV's.

I have a surround sytem with DTV so I doubt very much that the tuner and speakers would mean THAT much to me.


Would appreciate your help. Thanks.

[c627627]

Well that's the reasoning behind some of us buying the Panasonic TH-50PH9UK or TH-42PH9UK.

1. We use cable / satellite boxes.
2. With the money saved from not buying tuner/speakers, we can buy surround sound if we don't already have it in which case you can invest the savings elsewhere.


So you end up with a setup that is overall better than Plasmas that cost a thousand $ more, sometimes two thousand $ more.


I don't understand why Panasonic doesn't have any competition when it comes down to buying big screen quality Plasmas without tuners and speakers. I mean why not save so much $ by not buying features many of us do not need. This is a huge market of people who think like that we're talking about.

[mkoesel]

[QUOTE=Felgar]MMHV (my mileage has varied)... Did you get 1:1 for sure? (just outputting 1368x768 won't do it) And did you have an adequate cable?[/quote]

Absolutely.

What doesn't the DVI blade do?

Perhaps it easiest to start with what it does do:

525 (480) /60p
625 (575) /50p
750 (720) /60p
1,125 (1,080) /60i
640 × 480 @60Hz
852 × 480 @60Hz
800 × 600 @60Hz
1,024 × 768 @60Hz
1,066 × 600 @60Hz
1,366 × 768 @60Hz

It may be possible to sync any number of other resolutions. But when we are spending $3000 or more on a display we want have things supported out of the box so that if something goes wrong we don't get brushed aside by tech support or when it comes time to use the warranty.

So what's missing?

Any signal at 120/75/72/50/48/30/25/24 Hz
Any 16:10 PC resolution (with a 16:10 letter box and zoom aspect modes while they're at it)
1080p/60p
480i/60i
Probably others I have missed

Yeah, but industry standard is to use HDMI for typical TV resolutions, so all I'm saying is that Panasonic figured they may as well go with that approach and use DVI for something with more flexibility.

But we're not really concerning ourselves with their past reasoning at this point. What they did five years ago is important only academically. It should have been clear from the context of my original post (and the follow-up discussion) that I am talking about the future and what can be done today to make the displays more modern and in touch with current needs and applications and with those going forward.

[mkoesel]

[QUOTE=c627627]I don't understand why Panasonic doesn't have any competition when it comes down to buying big screen quality Plasmas without tuners and speakers. I mean why not save so much $ by not buying features many of us do not need. This is a huge market of people who think like that we're talking about.[/QUOTE]

They do have competition - from NEC and Pioneer. Still not much, admittedly.

As for the savings, its disappearing, sadly. The price differential is all but gone today. When I bought my set in 2004, the price difference was at least $1000 (20% less than the consumer model).

[c627627]

NEC and Pioneer have commercial models?

[optivity]

[QUOTE=mkoesel]They do have competition - from NEC and Pioneer. Still not much, admittedly.

As for the savings, its disappearing, sadly. The price differential is all but gone today. When I bought my set in 2004, the price difference was at least $1000 (20% less than the consumer model).[/QUOTE]So if you buy a commercial model & add two HDMI or two DVI terminal boards... it may wind up costing more? :eek:

[mkoesel]

[QUOTE=c627627]NEC and Pioneer have commercial models?[/QUOTE]

Absolutely. Search the forum.

[mkoesel]

[QUOTE=optivity]So if you buy a commercial model & add two HDMI or two DVI terminal boards... it may wind up costing more? :eek:[/QUOTE]

It does not sound inconceivable. Especially in principle, where the MSRP (for the 50") are now running at $3999 vs. $3499 _in favor of the consumer model_. Even the 600U consumer model is equal the commercial at $3999. This a giant contrast to years gone by, although last years 50U models were the ones that really started the revolution.

Now, in practice, I think the commercial models may still enjoy a slight edge in pricing although it probably disappears once you add the digital blades and a cheap stand. All this of course is relative to where you are comparing prices from. I looked at pricegrabber and things are pretty neck and neck there.

[optivity]

Right, my belief is PDP makers have cut their prices to the bone... so they can't really sell their TVs/monitors for much less and remain profitable. Of course, as the competition dwindles there is less pressure/incentive for those who remain in the business to cut their price. PDP makers will instead continue to offer more features in order to maintain value-added price levels and use cosmetics (e.g. color of bezel) or unnecessary picture "tweak ability" (which IMO opinion probably causes more harm then good) to differentiate commercial from consumer offerings.

[zaracsan]

[QUOTE=tunnelight06]Would it make any sense to buy a monitor instead of a TV when I have no plans on using this for anything else but our television set?

Is PQ any better with the monitors than with the TV's.

I have a surround sytem with DTV so I doubt very much that the tuner and speakers would mean THAT much to me.


Would appreciate your help. Thanks.[/QUOTE]

A couple of thoughts not covered...

The included tuners on consumer model are of value to some owners. It can be argued that an OTA (over the air) signal is a less compressed source than are both cable and satellite feeds. In some broadcast markets, the amount of OTA HD programming available makes tuners an appealing option; others located in small markets may not be so lucky with their program choices. Some of the consumer models are also equipped with dual tuners that allow for picture-in-picture and/or split screen functions that a good number of people (myself included) do find of interest. Some of the consumers sets are also including SD memory card readers. While not particularly important to me, others consider it a nice feature to have.

PQ, or possibly more correctly stated, the ability to tweak the PQ has always been part of the allure of commercial displays. There are a handful of people here that make a pretty fair living tweaking displays. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but not everyone feels the benefits are worth the cost. That is a personal choice, but I have seen the value of this service and feel it can be worth the cost incurred; others would argue they don't feel the benefit is worth the cost. Only you can decide which is true for you. Nevertheless, the expectation is that commercial models will allow for the ability to adjust a display to a greater degree than consumers models can be tweaked.

When we really drill down a bit, it is often aesthetics that is the real reason for preferring a commercial display. The minimalist in me does much prefer the plain, unadorned and clean look of the thin matte black Panny bezel. I really don't like the way most speakers integrate and prefer that a display have the ability to remove any included speakers. Having said that, I would also point out that some buyers do want speakers, if only for those times when they don't want to fire up the surround system; like when watching the news in the morning, or late night viewing when others have already gone to bed. For those with a dedicated theater space, this is less of a concern; but for those with multi-use rooms, the value of a second set of small speakers is measurable for them.

There has been some discussion here that argue the build quality is somehow more rugidized on the commercial sets. Logic would agree with this thinking, but I can't tell you exactly which parts (or assemblies) are truly beefier. I do think the characterization of interest as a "huge market" is a bit of an overstatement. The real market is airport terminals, commercial signage, the broadcasting industry, corporate use and the many other truly commercial applications. The multi-panel functions are likewise included mostly for commercial user.

When you look at the input choices, it is clear (to me) that Panasonic is not particularly interested in catering specifically to the consumer market, and is not inclined to make changes based solely on the needs of consumers. If you consider that the largest market for these displays really is for those that are actual commercial users, it becomes more understandable why Panasonic makes the choices it does for inputs. As the consumer that wants a commercial display remains a minority interest to Panasonic, I would be careful to not confuse wishful thinking with reasonable expectations, where it concerns inputs on these displays.

[mkoesel]

[QUOTE=zaracsan]When you look at the input choices, it is clear (to me) that Panasonic is not particularly interested in catering specifically to the consumer market, and is not inclined to make changes based solely on the needs of consumers. If you consider that the largest market for these displays really is for those that are actual commercial users, it becomes more understandable why Panasonic makes the choices it does for inputs. As the consumer that wants a commercial display remains a minority interest to Panasonic, I would be careful to not confuse wishful thinking with reasonable expectations, where it concerns inputs on these displays.[/QUOTE]

I absolutely agree with you on who the target market is.

But I still believe that a monitor with analog input only is clearly a legacy device no matter how you slice it. In today's world, commercial applications will not be limited to (or even dominated by, necessarily) devices with only legacy ports available. After all, clearly the most popular use of a VGA port is to attach a computer. Soon, if not now, the most popular way to attach a computer to a monitor is no longer a VGA port. So right there we see an opportunity to keep up with the changing needs of the customer.

The market will ultimately determine the issue of course. Just like the market demanded HDMI and DVI input board. There was clearly a demand for those features, which means they are either used in the commercial market with some substantial frequency, or that Panasonic produced them for another type of target customer. Even if its the former, then we can still take heart in knowing that their feature set coincides positively with that of the HT enthusiast. That being said, I don't know how strong the correlation might be for features I've listed above. But I see, for example, 1080p/24 digital signal being a likely one for the broadcast community (with HD-SDI admittedly already providing that for them), while 16:10 PC resolution support would be a big one for the boardroom.