what does everybody think about 120hz and lcd's

I am with Shadorn on this one, I was looking at both plasma's and LCD's for a few months. 120Hz or not LCD's have a motion blur to them.

Sure a LCD might be a bit more bright, but they will not have the deep blacks and the depth to the picture a great plasma has. The colors are more rich as well on a plasma.

I ended up getting the Pioneer Kuro.. just amazing! I looked at everything.

If you watch a lot of movies defiantly go with the plasma.

I have a Sony with no noticeable blur. Plasmas have a glare that may not be appropriate in many situations.

"Shadorne, you put that plasma in a brightly lighted room(natural daylight)and you're right there's no contest, the LCD wins every time."

Agree with that which is why I got two (lowly 60 Hz refresh rate) TVs. The plasma goes in our darkish master bedroom and the LCD goes in the almost floor to ceiling/wall to wall windows living room. Love 'em both for different reasons - kind of like tube vs SS or LPs vs vinyl.

I will add that I am so happy not to be a videophile: noise, jaggies, motion blur, rainbows, low contrast, under/over color saturation, none of it bothers me in the least. Thank you Lord, oh, thank you!

Funnily enough my experience is the reverse - LCD works terrible in dim light
(no contrast in blacks and dark scenes) whilst the plasma works great - even in
bright room. I am comparing Sharp Aquos to Panasonic Plasma Viera but frankly
it is no contest - the plasma is so much better. Of course the LCD may last
longer - so my comments only apply to the picture quality. It also works well as
a computer monitor - so LCD is not without its advantages.

Sports on plasma is so much better.

Agree w Shadorne. No contest btwn my 5 y.o Fujitsu plasma (720p) and my friends 6 m.o. sony LCD, esp on sports.