In the market for a plasma.........suggestions?

Tvad - I've worked for ABC (in NYC & Hollywood), channel 11 in NYC, CNN and several multimedia/post production companies in NYC, LA and ATL with full blown recording and editing studio departments. I can tell you the decision to purchase plasmas, cameras, speakers and a myriad of other studio equipment is rarely based on best of breed performance criteria. It's all about the business deal. What manufacturer can supply the studio with the broadest range of equipment at the best package price. It's about leveraging economies of scales and lowering the number of vendors you have to manage. See Procurement 101 for further details. Basing an equipment purchasing decision on what the pros use is not always as compelling as it seems.

11-01-06: Dawgbyte
Tvad - I've worked for ABC (in NYC & Hollywood), channel 11 in NYC, CNN and several multimedia/post production companies in NYC, LA and ATL with full blown recording and editing studio departments.

And what brand of video monitors were used?

Dawbyte, my credits are comprised entirely of network television production, and although I've never worked at a TV station except as a college intern, I'm sure the buying decision has much to do with what you say.

Is your point to discredit my example of the use of Sony and Panasonic by NBC, CBS and ABC simply as a matter of discussion and debate? Surely, you are not suggesting that Sony or Panasonic displays shouldn't be near the top of a buyer's list?

I've never seen Hitachi, Philips, Pioneer, GE, Sanyo, Sansui, LG, Daewoo or Samsung in the production or post production facilities at any of the Big Three networks in Hollywood. Is it because Sony and Panasonic gave their products away in sweetheart deals, or is it because they are leading innovators of video production and post production equipment? Perhaps it's a mixture of both.

As I say, the buyer should buy what he/she likes, and feel free to throw out my observation entirely.

Cripes, this isn't life or death.

Soundsmith1
I was not trying to get confusing and criticle, basically people would see the sets as LCD from sony.. excuse the exact term.. But I kinda was stating 2 seprate by Saying the "3 Panel LCD " from sony and the SXRD from sony, I just blended the statements together... As far as the picture being worse or better is gonna be tuff to prove one way or the other and money is a factor.. Mostly the new LCD's cost more than Plasma as well, and I have seen them tweeked with just as good of picture and not the downfalls of Burnt images, and Simple Bulb changes can save the LCD a plasma fails and its panel is done from my understanding. Sorry for the confusing post.

Whether or not LCD bulb changes are truely possible by a consumer or not is a matter of debate. Know anyone who has actually changed one?

Burn in in plasma is basically a myth as far as current residential displays. LCds form of "burn in" is MUCH more common, which is an uneveness in image light/contrast due to bulbs malfunctioning. Extremely common.

Sorry, Undertow, but the technologies are very different in operation which is why I drew the distinction. The Three-Chip LCD rear-projection and LCOS both indeed do produce great pictures and resolution, but I have yet to see an LCD flat panel over about 25" that I'd buy or recommend. The larger they get, the grainier, and they all seem to have that "cartoonish" look to the colors. Reproduction of blacks continues to be a problem. For flat panels, I'll stick with plasma. And yes, I am critical.
TVAD, I appreciate the fact that you've had direct experience in the "pros;" more insight into the topic always helps. Good info.