Upcoming plasma 1080p tv's vs Sony SXRD LoCS?

Hey guys,
Check out Randy Tomlinson's review of the Sony KDS-R60XBR1 60" SXRD RPTV in the December 2005 issue of The Perfect Vision.
He compares it with his reference 55" Hitachi plasma display.
Compared to the Hitachi plasma, the Sony SXRD had "flesh tones were more believable and hard to fault on the Sony. Resolution, too, was an easy Sony win." "The Sony also had less video noise and a smoother, more film like picture at close viewing distances. Up close the plasma exhibited a bit of the screen door effect." He also said the black levels were much better on the Sony.
He said that the plasma did hold the edge in the "you are there" illusion at first, but raising the GAMMA CORRECTION control a notch on the Sony made them EQUAL in this regard.
His conclusion:
"the KDS-R60XBR1 will give you a better overall picture and longer life [and with no screen-burn potential] than ANY plasma now available, and for less money. Rear projection sets produced up to this point--move to the rear, SXRD has set a new standard."
Interesting review.
Glad to know that someone else agrees with my conclusions.
Angela

Certainly an interesting discussion. Plasma, LCD, and CRT are direct view technologies, while LCosS ( Sony SXRD and JVC D-ILA), DLP and LCD-P are projection technologies. I prefer direct view for PQ at this point becuase it gives more realism to me.

1. CRT- This technology is quickly becoming unavailable as in the past. I dont doubt it strengths. Weaknesses are peak brightness and a propensity to a long list of artifacts including Moire, Gaussian Beam, Drift, screen regulation and magnetic interferrence. But again, for better or for worse, its not a real consideration for the OP question becuase it is disappearing rapidly from stores.

2. Plasma - Its pretty interesting as some folks have a real hard time with objectively looking at the thing. For instance " Spatial and Temporal dithering." Well OK. Lets look at a Pioneer Elite Pro 1130 plasma display ( currently available). It doesnt have that stuff. No way. And certainly no motion artifacts. Major brand plasmas do not have motion artifacts. The more realism issue is not an illusion that passes. It stays and the images dont fatigue most viewers like displays that depend on bright light to show video information. IN the dark, plasmas tend to really outdistance other technologies, but not in lighter environments.

3. LCos- First a couple of things. Randy Tomlinson is just another poster at avsforum.com in the plasma section like the rest of us. When you run with the writers and manufacturers and dealers in your HT and audio groups and national meetings and such, they are people with interest and knowledge just like us. Except some of the periodicals have various advertiser pressures that can affect their comments in one way or another. This has been discussed thoroughly and then some in the whole Wilson audio reviewer threads. That aside, the Hitachi 55 inch, which I looked at side by side with their 42 inch ALIS panel in direct comparison same source at CES in January, is a good plasma but isnt as strong in PQ as their 42 inch one. Also, I just wanted to point out that some specific comments really indicate a concerning bias. Plasma in the residential setting has almost zero potential for burn in. I mean none. Unless you really really try. I have NEVER seen it in the residential setting, and certainly havent had it myself. If it is so great a problem? Why can I only see it on old monitors in train stations and airports? Any reviewer that lists this as an advantage for an alternative products is really reaching and should know better. Plasma burn in- a real myth. Up close it exhibited SDE- well yes sure. But how close do people watch their movies? AT 10 feet people with 20/20 vision do not see SDE. ON the 1080P plasmas, you dont get any even on the big ones until 3-4 feet. 3-4 feet. On a 103 inch plasma. Believe it. Now- descfribing the you are there effect as "an illusion" is silly. I guess that is a shared and very persistent illusion. Let me put it this way- My dog gets tricked by the plasma and gets involved with the dog scenes on my plasma if there is one in a movie. Kinda funny. IN front of my LCDs and CRTs, he just sits there. He knows the difference between watching a TV and something more realistic!!! HAHA. But its true. The flesh tone thing blows the deal on the Tomlinson review entirely. A plasma really shows extremely realistic skin tones and details. When watching the Sony SXRD, which again is RAZOR SHARP for sure, and sharper than my plasma also FOR SURE. the skin tones are simply less realistic. I am watching a very sharp brilliant TV, and I know it. The plasma, when calibrated, is simply closer to real world. And SED, I am going to say again, is just scary good.

I do think the Sony SXRD Line sets a new standard for rear projection technology. And I recommend it to many friends for various reasons Its a really good display. Really good. But to say that its head and shoulders above plasma technology really is a bit foolhardy!

i work in the financial ind....sed: due to plummeting lcd, plasma prices and the inherent cost adv in DLP RPTV, sed can't meet production costs to be viable commercially and that is why its being delayed, not the actual technological performance itself

Henry- you are exactly right. The price drop really makes it difficult for a new technology to be rolled out since they gotta compete with stuff thats been out awhile and has seen falling prices.

SORRY THAT I STARTED SUCH A DISAGREEMENT BY STARTING THIS THREAD. GUESS I SHOULD HAVE NEVER STARTED IT.
MY APOLOGIES.
Lanny