The AVS forum has skads of evaluations
JJK

I bought a Panasonic TC-P42X1 plasma TV a few months ago. It's fantastic. At 720p it was priced much lower than the 1080p televisions and there is no visible difference in a screen that size.

It has an analog and digital tuner. The blacks are CRT like and it is virtually devoid of the motion artifacts I can't stand watching on an LCD TV. I do not notice a difference in my power usage, but Panasonic claims that these current models use less power than their previous models at the expense of some brightness (you could have fooled me).

Burn-in is not a problem, but it is often confused with IR (Image Retention). The television needs a break-in period of around 180 hours and should be kept at the default standard picture setting during that time with the image stretched to fill the screen.
That setting has a lower brightness and contrast and is suitable for break-in. After that time you can play with the custom settings. IR will happen if a still image is left on the screen for awhile (white is the worst) such as the DVD logo when a DVD player is on with no disc. However it goes away within a few minutes of playing the television and it also has a wiping utility in the menu to do the same if you want to use it. IR is not Burn-in.

I bought the the television from Sears when they had a special on it for $600. It can be had for around the same from a few vendors if you search. Again, the 720p vs 1080p is really hype when it comes to this TV. The TV is fantastic.

You can read more about this model here:

The Official Panasonic TC-P50X1 and TC-P42X1 Owner's Discussion & Information Thread - AVS Forum

The settings and issues thread is here:

The Official Panasonic 12G Settings/Issues Thread - AVS Forum

John

EDIT: I see that Best Buy has the 50 inch version of this plasma television (TC-P50X1) for $800 plus tax. and BuyDig for $769 delivered. That's $100 less than Best Buy after you pay the taxes there. BuyDig only collects the taxes if you live in New Jersey. So basically we are talking about a $200 difference or less between the 42 inch and 50 inch versions of this set.

Sony Oz have just dropped their price on 46" Bravia EX1s from A$4000 to $2300 - these are "old fashioned" 100Hz models. But they still have the excellent "Motionflow" technology
I decided I could handle a bit of fast motion blur and took the punt - the new 200Hz 40" model costs A$5,000.

Since you emphasized the "budget" part, the Vizio LCD HDTVs are a tremendous value for the money, they really do look quite good and the build quality is perfectly acceptable. I've purchased six of them for various purposes and have been quite satisfied. I have a number of friends that own them and they are also satisfied. There are certainly better looking HDTVs available, but they cost significantly more than the Vizios. They seem to be most reasonably priced at Costco.

I just bought the 40" Eco version of the Vizio LCD to replace my old Toshiba rear projection and for the money (~650 on sale) the thing is amazing. Coming from a 17 year old SD TV no matter what you get it will blow you away.

I was in the same situation with over research and keept getting sold on all the bells and whistles then just decided to get a basic tv NOW and enjoy. If I wind up thinking I missed out on some feature I can get a new one and use this 40" as a HD monitor for Vegas. I am really trying to talk my self in to using this as a monitor it would be awesome.

it's not in the 4X" range (32"), but I got this one from BJ's & I'm happy with it:
here.

That plus a BD player from BJ's cost me under $500 (an extra ~$50 for the wall mount, but under $500 for TV & BD, including shipping). Very happy with it all (except the BD: all the fancy menu's are annoying to navigate through, I prefer the "simple" DVD menu's).

It's nothing fancy but it has PC in, two HDMI in's, 2x AV in, component in, SVid in, built in NTSC/ASTC tuner & the remote includes batteries. :)

We have it in the bedroom (only tube in the house, no TV for the kids allowed). We have no complaints @ ~13' away on the head of our bed. Would love a surround sound system but, you know, $$ needed other places. :)

I updated my post above with the current price of the 50 inch version from the same two vendors because it falls within Tim's price range. A two hundred dollar difference or less.

John

Thanks very much for the replies, guys. Very much appreciated, keep them coming.

About once every 8 or 9 months I seem to get back into this mode of trying to decide on a new TV. The new Ken Burns series about the National Parks (starting tonight, I think) was what prompted this to rear its head again in the past week.

John (Craftech), thanks for pointing out the bargains that can be had in plasma displays. They truly are very cost-competitive now for what most people would consider superior picture quality (compared to a comparably priced LCD TV). But my main concern is the overall energy use of plasma display panels. My wife doesn't work, and on days that she's home all day the TV is likely to be on all day long -- from 6:30 AM to well after midnight. (A bad, bad habit, yes, but one that's unfortunately not likely to change...)

Coursedesign, thanks for throwing a wrench into the works by pointing out the new LED backlight (or edgelight) technology. I was unaware of that, but it is making me rethink things a bit. The improved picture quality would be a bonus, but one at this point I probably would forego paying a premium price for. However, the reduced energy use (see above paragraph...) has some appeal, so I'll have to crunch some numbers to see how long it would take for the improve picture quality to pay for itself. Also, I'm wondering how long that premium sales price (for LED lighting) can be sustained before prices come down. Maybe its worth waiting a couple months to see.

Financially, I can pay more than the $700-$1000 that I mention in my original post, but that low range has a lot of appeal to me. This TV will be in a high traffic living room, not isolated in a basement home theatre room or anything like that. With 3 kids in the house (oldest is 17, youngest is 10), I fear that in one careless moment my purchase will be destroyed by a flying wii-remote or by somebody bumping into it with a Guitar Hero guitar or a school backpack, etc. Additionally, given the number of hours this TV will be on, I'd rather wear out a $1000 TV than a $2000 TV.

So while I'm usually a very quality-oriented, want-all-the-data-to-make-a-decision kind of person, this past week I've been in a mood that matches Joe's post -- just get something affordable and start watching now, and chances are that will be fine. If not, buy something better later, which by then will be cheaper anyways.

(And John Cline -- you sure buy a lot of TV's! Thanks for the comfort in knowing that Vizio TV's have been satisfactory purchases for you, with the understanding that they aren't the best around, but acceptable for what they are.)

Again, thanks so much for all your posts. (Gosh, I feel like this was an awards show speach or something. Sorry for everybody else that I left out...)

Tim L

protection for the TV.

My wife used to watch TV all day to. ~6 months w/o a TV solved that problem. You could do the same (in reality, it serves no useful purpose, uses up a decent chunk of change & time)

I bought a panasonic 1080p plasma this Feb. Last year's model, 42". I love it. Colors are rich without being distorted and movies look fantastic because of the rich blacks. If you're a movie person, I would go with plasma. This year's models use less energy, still more than an LCD though. The other consideration is the ambient light in the room, if you have a room with a lot of sunlight, LCD's are better because they can be brighter and compete with the ambient light.

If I were you, I'd get the Panasonic TC-P42S1. Under $800 at Amazon. That is probably your best Picture quality to price value. CNET compared to Pioneer Kuro's which were the best TVs made before they stopped production. CNET says

In our testing, we found that the S1 series model does indeed suck less juice than before. Its picture quality is also very good, starting with deep black levels that nearly rival the all-time champ in that department, Pioneer's Kuro models. Picture quality nitpicks include less-than-accurate color, which thanks to the company's minimal user-menu controls, cannot be adjusted. Despite these issues we found a lot to like about the TC-PS1 series, not the least of which is its appealing price point.

If you wanted to spend less, you can get the Panasonic 720p plasma from Amazone under $600. If you really want to geek out on info, try the avs forums. Here's the thread for the Panasonic S1 series.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1127194&page=51

You could even get the high-end Panasonic tc-p42g10 within your budget. It's under $900 at Amazon. CNET says with Kuro's no longer being made "The Panasonic G10 series is the new king. "

Happy hunting.

John (Craftech), thanks for pointing out the bargains that can be had in plasma displays. They truly are very cost-competitive now for what most people would consider superior picture quality (compared to a comparably priced LCD TV). But my main concern is the overall energy use of plasma display panels. My wife doesn't work, and on days that she's home all day the TV is likely to be on all day long -- from 6:30 AM to well after midnight. (A bad, bad habit, yes, but one that's unfortunately not likely to change...)
-----------------------------
You may be blowing the energy consumption out of proportion. I don't know why the industry made such a deal out of the purported increase in power consumption from a plasma television.

Take a look at this chart comparing the power usage of 150 models of both LCD and plasma televisions.

Now take a look at the far right column that gives the annual estimated cost. Neither the dollar amount nor the differences are that great.

From their footnotes:

Annual cost: The amount of money the TV would cost to run over 365 days, assuming it's turned on for 5.2 hours a day and off for 18.8. We currently use the average price of energy in the U.S. during 2008, which is 11.35 cents per kilowatt hour according to the Energy Information Administration. These numbers were updated April 10, 2009.

John

Like a CRT, Plasma TVs do lose brightness with age. The newer sets have mitigated this problem to some degree, but it's still a factor to consider. Personally, I'm not a fan of plasma TV technology.

I just saw a nice Sony (keeping on topic ;-) at Wal Mart tonight. For around $1100:
46" Sony Bravia

They also had a 40" version for $800:
40" Sony Bravia

Jim

Plasma technology has come a long way. They are very impressive in terms of dealing with issues that used to be liabilities for plasmas.

Panasonic's higher end Plasma TV's have implemented new tech that they have dubbed NEO PDP panels. The difference between the 2008 plasmas and the 2009 is pretty big. These came out about 2 months after I bought mine. I was considering selling my brand new TV and getting a 2009 model. When I started looking at buying a TV, I was looking at LCD, but the plasma images were just better.
The Panasonic X1 line does not have NEO PDP panels, so I wouldn't go for that, but the S1's and the G1's have it.

The Neo PDP panels

have better blacks and contrast ratios...I think the reviews bear this out.
use less energy.....the chart above shows this to be true the 46" G10 is rated as Good and costs $37 a year to run
are rated to last 100,000 hours to half brightness.........who knows if this will be true, but that's 30 years at normal viewing.

Any new plasma should get you easily beyond a decade. (Last year's Panasonic are rated this as well.) Also, you should not be watching your TV on 100 percent brightness anyway. After I calibrated, my brightness setting is 58 out of a 100. Presumably in a decade or so, if the image dims, I can compensate, but turning up the brightness setting.

btw, anyone watching the Giants-Cowboys game? The new Dallas stadium has the world's largest HD screens, 13,000 sq ft worth. 600 tons of TV. (It's an LED)

"The new Dallas stadium has the world's largest HD screens"

Yes and apparently they are hanging just a bit too low.

http://gizmodo.com/5343377/punt-hits-worlds-largest-hd-video-screen-in-cowboys-stadium

Ahhh, sports people are such geniuses. So much for having your TV at eye level. I don't play football underneath mine, in fact, I don't play football ON my TV either.

The Neo PDP panels
----------------
I am not seeing this in the reviews.

Here are the Amazon.com User Reviews for the Panasonic TC-P50S1.

Here are the Amazon.com User Reviews for the Panasonic TC-P50X1.

Here are the Newegg User Reviews for the Panasonic TC-P50S1.

Here are the Newegg User Reviews for the Panasonic TC-P50X1.

I tend to go by user reviews because it is more helpful than lab measurements in my opinion. It is the sustained usage that shows up the pros and cons of electronics or most any other product. Same way when I buy a car. I go by the Consumer Reports Frequency of Repair Records rather than anything Motor Trend has to say.

Those AVS Forums I linked above also bear out what I am saying. On those forums professional TV calibrators participate. Their calibrations don't bear out what you said in terms of the S1 series being a better choice than the X1 series. Most any plasma has better blacks than an LCD as does most any CRT display. The X1 looks fantastic in my living room. It is a true bargain.

John

depending on the length of time the user had it & the complaint/compliment, I ignore user reviews. Why? Because many times people only review to complain, and after reading many user reviews, they complain about something that was described in the manual or description that they didn't like, but they bought it anyway. :/

I find both the Amazon and Newegg user reviews very useful, but you have to be incredibly selective.

Think of it as finding your wife's diamond ear rings after they were swallowed by your baby.

:O)

The thing with Amazon and Newegg reviews is there are not answering the question of which TV is better? this or that?. The question they are answering is you happy with your TV. It doesn't mean the reviewers have even seen the other set.

When I was talking about NeoPDP and the reviews, I was mainly talking about the G10, not the X1 vs s1. The g10 should not be in this argument between an x1 and an s1, except for the price drops. If you can find on of the current bargains on this set for under $900 for the 42" and under a grand for the 46" and that's within your budget, game over. The reviews for the g10 have been raves on CNET and Avs forum. Plus the NEO PDPs are energy savers.

but if I'm happy with my TV why would I want to get another one to compare it to? ;)

Well that's kind of my point.

What would be a better, more informed review? Someone who has only tried Final Cut Pro and thinks it's a five star editor?
Or someone who has actually tried Avid, Final Cut, Premiere Pro and Vegas?