Print 46 comment(s) - last by TakinYourPoint.. on Mar 22 at 5:20 AM

Panasonic might give up on Plasma TVs

Reports are circulating that TV maker Panasonic has halted the development of plasma TVs and is considering exiting the market altogether. Panasonic wouldn't be the first major TV manufacturer to exit the sagging plasma TV market, as Vizio threw in the towel on the segment back in 2009.
The move is part of Panasonic's plan to turn around its ailing TV business.  For its part, a Panasonic representative was more nebulous about the company’s intentions, stating, "We are considering a number of options regarding our TV business. But nothing has been decided yet.”

Panasonic announced in November of 2012 that it has plans to shed 10,000 workers by the end of March 2013. And last summer, Panasonic announced that it was teaming up with Sony to share costs and to collaborate on the production of next-generation OLED panels for TVs and other large displays. Many see OLED as the next big sreen technology in the TV industry. 

Source: Yahoo! News

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By chromal on 3/18/13, Rating: 0
RE: surprising
By Motoman on 3/18/2013 10:42:36 AM , Rating: 1
If only they were still making LED DLP TVs...

But yes. Granted that you can buy a perfectly good 50" LCD TV for about $500, it's a hard upsell to get to a plasma...

RE: surprising
By degobah77 on 3/18/2013 11:59:04 AM , Rating: 5
Perfectly good 50" LCD for $500? I'm sure that's a valid price point, but it won't be perfectly good for anyone who actually wants good picture quality and deep black levels.

The highest quality LCD that even comes close to plasma PQ is a $5000-$7000 Sharp ELITE, and even then the Panny plasmas still best it with color accuracy, for less than half the price.

RE: surprising
By fortiori on 3/18/13, Rating: -1
RE: surprising
By degobah77 on 3/19/2013 1:43:42 PM , Rating: 1
A high end full array local dimming LCD is very expensive, and definitely up there in PQ, but you can't compare a $3500 LCD to an $800 Plasma.

RE: surprising
By radium69 on 3/19/2013 4:44:00 AM , Rating: 2
Bought my LG PQ2000 Plasma for 500USD. Gives better quality than most LCD's in its price range.

Friend of mine has a Philips 45" LCD and with its Natural Motion it is more like "Motion Sickness" Disgusting.

That aside we have a Panasonic P65 downstairs. And it's been going flawlessly for over 4 years already.

I once got into an argument with my local hi-fi audio and video enthousiast. Told him he has been bribed by Samsung for their D8000 series. Since he found them better at image quality than a VT50.

I told him he was blind and never spoke to him again.
All the guys their that came to that shop we're also plasma fans. Too bad he has to close his shop down now.

Won't get a penny from me anymore...
Hope to scoop up the ZT60 in a year or two.

I don't watch a lot of TV, cause, commercials.
But I do watch a lot of movies and premium channels.
For use with XBMC and great quality rips there is just no other...

Hope they will continue, I wish Panasonic the best.
I will never switch out to washed out LCD, try cleaning smudges on that! Haha good luck.

Also they might be heavier but they are quite sturdy and build quality is splendid.

Panasonic Plasma > any LCD ever created.

RE: surprising
By on 3/18/2013 4:14:24 PM , Rating: 2
Making a comment that compares TVs strictly on a price level shows the root of the problem. Plasmas give a FAR better image than any LCD on the market, particularly Panasonics. Its a real shame that they are leaving the market, as OLEDs won't really be affordable anytime soon.

If you have sense, go grab one of those mid level Panasonics now while they are on sale, to at least tide you over until OLED gets cheaper.

Or just buy a projector, and win all over.

RE: surprising
By TakinYourPoints on 3/18/2013 9:19:04 PM , Rating: 4
Yup. Some people know the price of everything while knowing the value or quality of nothing.

Hell, some people don't even know what image quality is, they actually prefer enabling edge enhancement, motion smoothing, inaccurate rendering effects from hacks like local dimming, all the things you can get from LCD HDTVs.

RE: surprising
By Motoman on 3/19/2013 3:37:52 PM , Rating: 2

What people like me get is that the difference in image quality isn't worth the extra cost, so f%ck it.

Especially when the TV is at home and not side-by-side with the other TVs.

The amount of enjoyment that you miss when you buy the $500 LCD instead of the $3,000 plasma? 0%

RE: surprising
By TakinYourPoints on 3/22/2013 5:20:01 AM , Rating: 2
Well, this is you we're talking about. No standards and no eyeballs apparently.

RE: surprising
By sprockkets on 3/18/2013 10:46:01 AM , Rating: 4
LCD displays suck. You can keep your 240 refresh rate, dynamic LED lighting and other tricks to make a decent picture compared to plasma while paying $500 more for the same screen size.

RE: surprising
By SublimeSimplicity on 3/18/2013 10:59:54 AM , Rating: 3
I agree, just got a GT50 plasma. Panasonic is heavy into OLED, which will eventually eclipse plasma's in display quality. Problem is, it'll be tough to sell $4k+ OLEDs with very close to equal quality plasma's in the lineup for under 1/2 the price.

RE: surprising
By Pneumothorax on 3/18/2013 12:19:50 PM , Rating: 2
Was able to get a 65 inch VT50 for $2400. You cannot find a lcd tv that can beat the quality of this set. Just to come close to matching it, you're going to have to spend over 2x as much on a Sharp elite. It'll be a sad day if panasonic stops making plasmas as Samsung/LG plasmas don't come close in quality.

RE: surprising
By MrAwax on 3/18/13, Rating: 0
RE: surprising
By JackBurton on 3/18/2013 10:47:43 AM , Rating: 3
You would have been laughing because you don't know any better. The current king of 2D PQ performance is still the 2008/2009 Pioneer Kuro (9/9.5G), which is a plasma.

RE: surprising
By MrAwax on 3/18/2013 11:05:57 AM , Rating: 3
Plasma TV still have the best image quality for a lower price (Every year, Panasonic's plasmas are acclaimed for their unmatched quality).

The only drawback of plasmas are:
- lower brightness (not a problem for contrast because of their deep deep black levels but an issue for very bright rooms)
- higher consumption ($20-40/year more in electric)
- heavier (22.5kg for a 50" plasma vs 16kg for a 50" LCD/LED so wall hanging might require a bigger wallmount)

No LCD/LED can match exactly a good plasma in picture quality (clouding are still an issue) and those that come close are MUCH more expensive, like +50/100% more.
So there are still reasons to manufacture and buy plasmas until all people are brainwashed into buying LCD/LED.

RE: surprising
By Spuke on 3/18/13, Rating: -1
RE: surprising
By degobah77 on 3/18/2013 12:18:40 PM , Rating: 2
Plasmas are more than bright enough these days. But in any case, it's truly going to be a sad day when plasma tech progress dies because the Walmart masses buy nothing but the big, bright, cheap crap.

RE: surprising
By Spuke on 3/18/2013 1:28:22 PM , Rating: 2
Plasmas are more than bright enough these days.
That's not what I keep reading from the home theater guys. Those are their words not mine but go ahead and paint me with that broad brush of yours. And to the coward that rated me down, PROVE otherwise.

RE: surprising
By degobah77 on 3/18/2013 2:05:56 PM , Rating: 2
My brush was for the market in general.

I've owned multiple plasma panels over the last 10 years, never had an issue with brightness in well lit rooms, and apparently the newest ones are even brighter.

But I'd assert that most people buy the cheapest, brightest looking TV in the store which is going to be an LCD in torch mode. Fine by me, just wish it wouldn't negatively impact the availability of what the rest of us prefer.

People are such dicks.

RE: surprising
By Spuke on 3/18/2013 2:49:50 PM , Rating: 2
Fine by me, just wish it wouldn't negatively impact the availability of what the rest of us prefer.
I don't know if I'd call them dicks LOL but I see your point.

RE: surprising
By Mockingbird on 3/18/2013 12:43:42 PM , Rating: 2
I agree. I'm waiting for the "my 20 year old crt is still better than this crap" comment. I'm sure once OLED is released mass market we'll all be wondering how we put up with lcd/plasma compromises

RE: surprising
By Pneumothorax on 3/18/2013 9:45:20 PM , Rating: 2
OLED has at least a decade before taking off. No matter what the marketers tell you, they haven't really solved the poor life of the blue LEDs. Because of the blue led problem, oleds will have the tendency to have a 'blue led burnin' so you're trading one flaw for another. Once this is solved and yields go up, then oled will be a viable alternative. Until then you'll be stuck buying used panasonics and Kuros.

RE: surprising
By chripuck on 3/18/2013 11:15:07 AM , Rating: 2
You clearly don't know much about televisions. Plasmas still provide the best picture regardless of the price. Throw in the fact that you can get one for close to half the price of an equivalent "quality" level LED/LCD and it's a no brainer. Even bright rooms aren't an issue mostly, I have a 50" 6 year old Panasonic plasma in a room with 12'x24' bank of windows with no viewing issues.

RE: surprising
By MrAwax on 3/18/2013 11:24:53 AM , Rating: 2
At least you could recognize that LCD are "better" at being in brightly lit rooms ... at the cost of color accuracy, motion blur, clouding and a bigger cost.

RE: surprising
By Dr. Kenneth Noisewater on 3/18/2013 12:00:01 PM , Rating: 2
Hard to find a 70+" Plasma priced comparable to 70+" LCDs though :/

RE: surprising
By degobah77 on 3/18/2013 1:34:58 PM , Rating: 2
Hard to justify a panel at all at that size, mine as well get a projector if you want 70"+.

RE: surprising
By Spuke on 3/18/2013 2:56:02 PM , Rating: 2
Hard to justify a panel at all at that size, mine as well get a projector if you want 70"+.
Projectors are as much about the screen as the projector itself. I can get a decent 70" LCD for less than a projector plus screen. And if you listen to the experts, lots of people can use a 70 inch screen in their homes without it being too big. My family room is large enough for a 70 but honestly wouldn't get more than a 60 (current is 55).

RE: surprising
By degobah77 on 3/18/2013 5:27:36 PM , Rating: 2
Not saying I haven't wished for a 70" plasma (those 70/80" Sharp Aquos are massive but with mediocre PQ), but with that kind of money, I think I'd want to open things up a bit. With a projector and a screen, you can have just about any size you want. Unfortunately, with a projector, you truly are limited to very dark viewing environments if you want the best PQ.

Realistically, I'm trying to convince a certain someone of the need for a 65" ZT60, but I'll probably end up with a 60" VT60.

RE: surprising
By Solandri on 3/18/2013 6:08:03 PM , Rating: 2
Projectors are front-projection devices. That means their black levels directly affect their white levels because they're both reflecting off the same surface. Want bright whites? Then you'll have poor blacks because of ambient lighting reflecting off the same surface. Want dark blacks? Then you'll have dim whites because the screen is dark. The only work-around is to reduce the ambient lighting.

LCD, Plasma, and rear-projection DLP are all rear-projection devices. The front of the screen can be pitch black, but still light up fully when the rear light source is let through. So you can have the inky blacks along with bright whites that you can't get with a projector. The blacks are generated to (lack of) light reflecting off the front surface. The whites are generated by light transmitted through the front surface.

So no, it's not a simple matter of switching to a projector if you want 70"+.

RE: surprising
By degobah77 on 3/18/2013 6:58:09 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, and that is something I already stated elsewhere here. You do need a dedicated home theater setting to truly reap the benefits of a projector, AND a quality projector with comparable contrast ratio capabilities. But still, some would argue it's the best route if you're really looking for such a large image.

In a well lit room, LCD and Plasma are fine. For a true theater experience, though, I'd say pitch black room and a projector is the only way to go.

But like I said before, people are such dicks.

RE: surprising
By degobah77 on 3/18/2013 7:01:51 PM , Rating: 2
Myself included, as I write this edit post...

And upon re-reading what I posted, it's clear that I did not speak of having the desired ambient lighting to make a projector's PQ comparable, but it was in my head when I forgot to type it :)

RE: surprising
By LiquidM on 3/18/2013 12:53:06 PM , Rating: 2
Like other guys said, you know nothing about display technology. Plasma is still the best affordable technology for TV. Panasonic has won many awards for their Plasma picture quality. Its sad to see that they finally throw in the white flag after the others. Though it will be interesting to see OLED vs LED backlight LCD in the very near future.
I am saving for a 55" 4K OLED TV...(US$4000?) Hopefully they will be available in 2 years time.

RE: surprising
By Spuke on 3/18/2013 2:57:11 PM , Rating: 2
I am saving for a 55" 4K OLED TV...(US$4000?) Hopefully they will be available in 2 years time.
Waiting for one of those too.

RE: surprising
By bigboxes on 3/18/2013 5:24:29 PM , Rating: 2
Lucky me I purchased a VT50 55" plasma last week. No LCD can touch it. No motion blur, no funky colors, no halo effect. It has unrivaled black levels, contrast, picture accuracy and viewing angles. The electricity usage sticker says $24 year in cost when watching 5 hours a day (at $.10kwh). I don't watch that set for that long in a day and I pay $.08kwh so I really don't see it costing $20-$40 more in electricity. I've got ultra thin LED LCD TVs in my office and bedroom and they are a poor alternative. Americans just want cheap and big, just like computer monitors.

By the time OLEDs come down in price I will be looking for an upgrade. Until then there's nothing that an LCD has that I need or want.

RE: surprising
By Reclaimer77 on 3/18/2013 9:43:12 PM , Rating: 1
LCD needs to go away too, quite frankly. OLED is where it's at. They just need to figure out how to manufacture OLED panels that size more cost effective.

Good For Television, Not So Good For Computers
By jcddude on 3/18/13, Rating: 0
By Marsman on 3/18/2013 8:50:55 PM , Rating: 2
Woohoo my 1st post.I have my pc connected to my Panasonic 42GT30A thrue hdmi & it's 1080P works instantly at that resolution.I love this Plasma the Picture is incredible colors are wonderfull it will be very hard to replace.So sad if Panasonic stops plasma they should stop when Oled is better than it not before.I Repaired tv's for the last 25 years & i have seen a lot of Pictues but this plasma has the best Picture i have seen.

By TakinYourPoints on 3/18/2013 9:22:00 PM , Rating: 1
I've had zero problems running my PC or laptop into my plasma, and I've had no problems running my laptop into other Panasonic plasmas

By johnsmith9875 on 3/18/2013 9:46:01 PM , Rating: 2
You should never use the VGA port as it will never support the full 1920 x 1080 resolution of the Plasma TV. Use HDMI or if you have DVI use a DVI to HDMI cable and you will get the full resolution.

By bigboxes on 3/19/2013 10:05:08 AM , Rating: 2
Not true. VGA does support 1080p resolution. The problem is with his (or theirs) graphics processor or what it outputs through their VGA port.

By jcddude on 3/19/2013 5:33:10 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I DID connect with an HDMI cable. It just wouldn't work, at any refresh rate. Perhaps it was only a problem with this model, as I see others were able to get it to work.

To Many LCD's and now..
By tng on 3/18/2013 9:54:17 AM , Rating: 2
The promise of OLED's.

Somewhere out there is a guy with a Pioneer Kuro that is weeping.

RE: To Many LCD's and now..
By JackBurton on 3/18/2013 10:44:37 AM , Rating: 2
Nope, the Pioneer Kuro owners have been smiling for almost 5 years now. :) The only worthy upgrade WOULD be an OLED set, more specifically, a large (70"+) 4K OLED set. That's the only thing I can see swapping out my 141FD for. ;)

RE: To Many LCD's and now..
By Spuke on 3/18/2013 11:53:53 AM , Rating: 2
Anyone that's happy with their purchase is going to be smiling.

RE: To Many LCD's and now..
By TakinYourPoints on 3/18/2013 9:15:13 PM , Rating: 2
Yup, had my 60" Elite Kuro since 2008, probably still the best monitor out there. :)

That said, Panasonics are actually getting up to their level of quality now. Not there yet, but damn close with calibration. Best of all, you're paying much less than you did in 2008 for this level of image quality. So good.

"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki