HOT: PT-61DLX75 DLP @ Costco for 3399.99$ with stand

[sparrow_69]

Recently noticed this 61" DLP tv with stand at Costco for 3399.99$ I couldn't find any other places in Canada that sold this tv, but considering the MSRP is 4499.99$ without the stand, this is a good deal. By the way, the tv is 720P and uses the HD2+ TI chip, which is the best 720P capable TI chip (good CR and NO wobbulation), obviously except for the xHD4 which is 1080P. TV is really nice looking aesthetically also!

[sparrow_69]

Forgot to mention that this TV also has an 8 segment color wheel.

[ciao]

Recently noticed this 61" DLP tv with stand at Costco for 3399.99$ I couldn't find any other places in Canada that sold this tv, but considering the MSRP is 4499.99$ without the stand, this is a good deal. By the way, the tv is 720P and uses the HD2+ TI chip, which is the best 720P capable TI chip (good CR and NO wobbulation), obviously except for the xHD4 which is 1080P. TV is really nice looking aesthetically also!

That's steal if it is the DLP. I have the previous year's version and you are absolutely correct on the superior HD2+ chip vs. all the inferior HD3/HD4 chips out there. Of course they have the 1080P sets with the xHD3/xHD4 chips, but they are too expensive and there are not enough sources.

[sparrow_69]

Yup, definitely the DLP...

[Geese_Howard]

which costco location? i havent seen this TV in my local location....

[Geese_Howard]

That's steal if it is the DLP. I have the previous year's version and you are absolutely correct on the superior HD2+ chip vs. all the inferior HD3/HD4 chips out there. Of course they have the 1080P sets with the xHD3/xHD4 chips, but they are too expensive and there are not enough sources.

ALSO DLP seems to have been surpassed by LcOS, the HD2+ chips are really good, the HD3 chips werent very good and the new XD chips are good but when compared to a LcOS chip IE Sony SXRD, they pale in comparison IMO

[Squeeky]

ALSO DLP seems to have been surpassed by LcOS, the HD2+ chips are really good, the HD3 chips werent very good and the new XD chips are good but when compared to a LcOS chip IE Sony SXRD, they pale in comparison IMO

I agree too.

[sparrow_69]

It just recently appeared at the Costco in Pointe-Claire, MTL, QC.

[Geese_Howard]

i bought the akai DLP with stand for 1199 last week, great tv for the price, if this is 3399.99, i have around $300 cash back with costco and a $300 giftcard, it might be nice to pick another TV up....

[alkapone]

....any pics?

[aw124]

Markham Costco is selling the old Model PT-60LCX64 LCD for the same price. $3400 with the matching stand.

http://www2.panasonic.com/static//LargerPhoto/PT-60LCX64-B_Angle.jpg (http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/vModelDetail?storeId=15001&catalogId=13401&itemId=95543&cacheProgram=11002&cachePartner=7000000000000005702&surfModel=PT-60LCX64-B&catGroupId=24976&surfCategory=LCD%20Projection%20TVs&displayTab=S)

Here's the new LCD PT-61LCX65 (LCD) and new DLP PT-61DLX75 (DLP)

http://www2.panasonic.com/static//LargerPhoto/PT-61LCX65_Angle_Rev.jpg

[synmag]

especially a 61" screen. Surely when you spend close to $4000.00 for a tv it's a long term investment. Eventhough by definition both 720p and 1080i is considered HDTV 95%+ of HD broadcast will be in 1080i. Most of primetime shows are in HD already and many feature movies and other events as well. 1080i is over three times the resolution of 720p which will be noticable on a 61" screen. There is also HDDVD/blueray DVD coming this year. In a couple of years you won't be able to find a 720p set on the market and your $4000 tv will be worth next to nothing if you try to sell it to upgrade.

I don't mean to preach but I just don't get it. I would only consider a 720p set if it was around $1000.00 or less. That's because the 1080i/p sets will drop by more than that and I can break even by buying 1080i/p in a few years.

It may not matter that much on a 42" screen but even then I would want the 1080i/p

It's just IMHO so please don't flame.

[alkapone]

Those pics are fantastic....the screen that is....FOR REAL...or simulated?

[cyril2]

[QUOTE=synmag]especially a 61" screen. Surely when you spend close to $4000.00 for a tv it's a long term investment. Eventhough by definition both 720p and 1080i is considered HDTV 95%+ of HD broadcast will be in 1080i. Most of primetime shows are in HD already and many feature movies and other events as well. 1080i is over three times the resolution of 720p which will be noticable on a 61" screen.

Balderdash! Who told you that? 1080i stands for 1080 interlaced scanning which means only 540 scanning lines are on the screen at one time or 540p. To give the impression that 1080i will be 3 times better than 720p is ill informed at best. If you don't want to be flamed then don't spread BS! I have had both 720p and 1080i sets and I assure you there is very little difference in the pictures to the human eye.

[sparrow_69]

Ah crap, sorry guys, but after seeing the pics of the new and old panny dlps, i've realized that the tv being sold is Panasonic's old 61" DLP model.

[synmag]

Balderdash! Who told you that? 1080i stands for 1080 interlaced scanning which means only 540 scanning lines are on the screen at one time or 540p.

Ok, first off DLP displays are not interlaced. CRT displays are interlaced. A DLP with wobulation technology can be thought of as interlaced but it still doesn't draw the picture one line at a time. Second, at 1/60 EDIT (that should be 1/30 sorry) of a second you are getting 1080 lines vs. 720 lines so while what you are saying is true in theory you neglect to mention the time variable which levels the playing field.

To give the impression that 1080i will be 3 times better than 720p is ill informed at best. If you don't want to be flamed then don't spread BS!

I used 3 times from memory, if you do the math it works out to about 2.2 times the resolution.

1280x720 = 921,600
1920x1080 = 2,073,600

2,073,600/921,600 = 2.25

I dont' know about you but I'll take 2 million "pixels" any day.

I have had both 720p and 1080i sets and I assure you there is very little difference in the pictures to the human eye.

This is true as I said for smaller displays but as you go up in size it becomes more and more appearant. What size tvs did you have for both? Why do you think all the new 60"+ size sets are 1080p? If you use a calibration DVD you can easily show the resolution difference. For me, if I can see the difference I want the better one. Especially when you are spending $4000.00.

[Marlek]

I used 3 times from memory, if you do the math it works out to about 2.2 times the resolution.

1280x720 = 921,600
1920x1080 = 2,073,600

2,073,600/921,600 = 2.25

I dont' know about you but I'll take 2 million "pixels" any day.


It's still not an accurate comparison, unless you are using a 1080p source -- which is virtually non-existant today and in the near future. 1080i is still interpolated by DLPs and scaled to 1080p. The DLP display is taking two 540 line frames and effectively stitching them together. So while the physical resolution is 1920 x 1080, you can't fairly compare pixel count to 1280 x 720.

[tucker]

It's still not an accurate comparison, unless you are using a 1080p source -- which is virtually non-existant today and in the near future. 1080i is still interpolated by DLPs and scaled to 1080p. The DLP display is taking two 540 line frames and effectively stitching them together. So while the physical resolution is 1920 x 1080, you can't fairly compare pixel count to 1280 x 720.
Exactly. This panny is a deal worth considering :)

[synmag]

It's still not an accurate comparison, unless you are using a 1080p source -- which is virtually non-existant today and in the near future. 1080i is still interpolated by DLPs and scaled to 1080p. The DLP display is taking two 540 line frames and effectively stitching them together. So while the physical resolution is 1920 x 1080, you can't fairly compare pixel count to 1280 x 720.

Your statement is very misleading for someone who doesn't know the technology. I think you are using interpolated incorrectly here as it is absolutely not interpolated. Interpolated implies information is made up by the tv such as a line doublers where it takes line 1 and 3 and uses them to make up content for line 2. This is not ture. A 1080p dlp displays a picture in two parts but does it so fast that no one has cleamed to see the difference. I know purists say 720p produces a smoother picture based on this. However you can see the difference in the resolution between the two. That's probably why most of the networks in the US are transmitting 1080i over the air and in the GTA all OTA broadcast is in 1080i. The few stations in the US that are broadcasting 720p are not doing it because it's better format but due to bandwidth issues.

[synmag]

Exactly. This panny is a deal worth considering :)

Anything is worth considering it's just I would have a hard time justifying spending that much on a 720p display when 1080p units are now available. I know there is no 1080p programming available todyay but the resolution difference is there.

The average tv viewer probaly will be happy with a 720 display but I'd still have an issue with the price. Another thing to keep in mind with a display this size is the viewing distance. Most people will want to be a good 15 feet away for HD and probably more for SD (480i).

[WalnutCrunch]

Synmag has a very valid point. If you plan on watching a 61" TV from closer than 10-12' away, go for a 1080p display.

All things being equal, a 1080p screen will do a better job than a 720p screen at displaying 1080i content. There is no scaling to be done (just "stitching", as someone here called it). There is also 50% more "pixels" in each direction, creating a higher resolution so you can sit closer to the screen.

By the same logic, a 720p display will be better at displaying 720p content because there's no scaling needed. But there aren't too many 720p sources out there.

Many do consider 720p to be a better broadcast format than 1080i (especially for sports) because it is better for motion. But some people are getting that confused with display resolution... they apply the same logic and think a 720p screen is better than a 1080p one. That's not necessarily true.

I have a 50' 720p screen and I think it looks great from 8-12' away. If I had a 60" one, I'd definitely get an 1080p display because of the extra resolution.

[tucker]

With all things being equal, I might agree with what you are both saying. However, I have not seen any 60" 1080P TVs with a stand for near this price. If you know of any please enlighten me. :|

[synmag]

With all things being equal, I might agree with what you are both saying. However, I have not seen any 60" 1080P TVs with a stand for near this price. If you know of any please enlighten me. :|

Well, 1080p displays only hit the market a few months ago as new technology which will make it difficult to find them at deep discounts. I got mine in December and I had been waiting for it for a while. It will probably take a while before they show up at costco.

I got the Toshiba 56hm195 which is a 56" model and it was $2990 plus $99 for a stand at their warehouse sale. You can probably get it for $3500.00 in a store now. I heard good things about the HP one but I'm not sure about the price. Sonys are better but much more expensive.

I'd suggest you keep an eye open for manufaturer's warehouse sales here. That's how I found out about the Toshiba sale.

[tucker]

I got the Toshiba 56hm195 which is a 56" model and it was $2990 plus $99 for a stand at their warehouse sale. You can probably get it for $3500.00 in a store now.
If you find this unit anywhere for $3500.00 pleeeze post it. At $2990 you are the luckiest man alive. This TV just came out and it has an MSRP of $4999.00

[synmag]

If you find this unit anywhere for $3500.00 pleeeze post it. At $2990 you are the luckiest man alive. This TV just came out and it has an MSRP of $4999.00

Check at teletime on Yonge street. When I was initially searching for it in stores to check it's pic quality I went there and although he didn't carry it he could order it for me if I was serious. He quoted me $3500 right off the bat and said to check at BB/FS and come back with their quotes which he can beat. So with a bit of arm twisting you should be able to get it for that with a stand thrown in.

I was lucky in the sense that they had it at the sale. Since I wasn't able to find on in store anywhere I didn't expect to see one at a warehosue sale. I was told there that the 62"/72" models had been back ordered by stores until March.

Toshiba way overinflates their MSRP prices. Don't be put off by that. I was shocked when the teletime guy quoted $3500 without any negotiations. I think he quoted around $4200 for the 62" version.

[tucker]

Thanks for the insight Synmag. I'm afraid I'm a bit far from Yonge Street, but this may help with negotiating. I haven't seen this set yet, since nobody in Lethbridge has it yet but hopefully I can find it in Calgary next time I go.

[synmag]

Thanks for the insight Synmag. I'm afraid I'm a bit far from Yonge Street, but this may help with negotiating. I haven't seen this set yet, since nobody in Lethbridge has it yet but hopefully I can find it in Calgary next time I go.

Yeah I didn't see you are located in Alberta. You should see if there is a main strip in Calgary and find an independent A/V shop. They seem to be pretty aggresive with their prices to stay alive. Just make sure it's an authorized dealer and not one of the many gray market shops we have here on Yonge St.

[Marlek]

Your statement is very misleading for someone who doesn't know the technology.

Actually the same could be said, moreso, for your statements.

I think you are using interpolated incorrectly here as it is absolutely not interpolated. Interpolated implies information is made up by the tv such as a line doublers where it takes line 1 and 3 and uses them to make up content for line 2.

You are right, interpolating is the wrong word. I should have said de-interlacing -- a process which still doesn't resolve to true 1920 x 1080.

A 1080p dlp displays a picture in two parts but does it so fast that no one has cleamed to see the difference. I know purists say 720p produces a smoother picture based on this. However you can see the difference in the resolution between the two. That's probably why most of the networks in the US are transmitting 1080i over the air and in the GTA all OTA broadcast is in 1080i. The few stations in the US that are broadcasting 720p are not doing it because it's better format but due to bandwidth issues.

Firstly, your previous page claim that 95% + of HDTV being 1080i is false. NBC, PBS and CBS use 1080i; FOX and ABC use 720p. Two major networks using 720p is hardly trivial and make up for more that 5% of the market.

Second, 720p produces a smother image than 1080i because at 1/30 of a second it's rendered two frames where 1080i has only rendered 1. It's that simple. More FPS at a lower resolution. So at 1/60 of a second:

1280 x 720 = 921,600
1920 x 1080 / 2 = 1,036,800

For 1080p - in this case we're actually taking about 1080p30, 30 full frames per second - two 1080i images are put together to make a whole one at 1/30 of a second. So how many pixels are being pushed in a second?

1280 x 720 x 60 full frames = ~55.3 Megapixels
1920 x 1080 x 30 full frames = ~62.2 Megapixels

Is 1080p a better format? Certainly. But when you're dealing with a 1080i source material the advantage is only marginal. We can talk again when true 1080p30 or 1080p24 source material is available. :cheesygri

Some resources:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6449_7-6361600-1.html

"Comparing a 50-inch 1080p DLP set to a 50-inch 720p DLP set, for example, he says you'll be hard-pressed to notice more detail with 1080i sources, especially from farther than 8 feet away. Even if you can see the difference, it will be much less obvious than, say, the difference between DVD and 720p HDTV."

"the main real-world advantage of 1080p is not the extra sharpness you'll be seeing, but instead, the smaller, more densely packed pixels. In other words, you can sit closer to a 1080p television and not notice any pixel structure, such as stair-stepping along diagonal lines, or screen door effect. This advantage applies regardless of the quality of the source."

http://news.designtechnica.com/talkback47_page1.html

"What 720p excels at is temporal resolution—in our hypothetical horse race, you can see the horses’ legs move. What 1080i excels at is spatial resolution—when the picture is relatively static, you get more sharpness, assuming the signal source is good enough."

[cyril2]

Just because you bought a 1080p set doesn't mean you know what your talking about. Both of my sets are big screen and a 720p set will actually do a better job on most moving images while 1080I will a better job on static images. Since most of us watch moving images on our tvs 720p is a valid choice. I traded in my DLP 720p for a RP CRT 1080i not because the resolution was better but because the wobulation color wheel technology of the DLP gave me migraines.

I am glad you are happy with your new TV but 720p is a valid choice for HDTV unlike the image of it you are trying to display at a much cheaper price point than 1080p. Personally I think the best value for ones money right now is RP CRT until they iron out the bugs in the newer Technologies and the price comes down.

Trust me there is very little difference to the human eye displaying 720p and 1080i and both my sets were set up with a DV disk. I also have over 20 years experience as an electronic tech and have been setting up monitors and tvs probably before you were born. You can find lots of so called experts saying one is better than the other but real world results will show little difference. Differences in pictures usally have more to do with the quality of components and scalers used.

Having said all that my advice to anyone wanting to purchase any of the new technology Tvs is to wait until spring. Hp has already anounced it will drop prices on its HDTV Plasmas by $1000 to $1500 a set and this will fuel the other technologies to do the same. Worth waiting a couple of months for wouldn't you say? SED may also come out soon and if it is as good as they say it may combine the best of the plasma and CRT world together with a 100,000 to 1 conrast ratio and response time of 1ms. Expect the initial price to be fairly high though.

[synmag]

You are right, interpolating is the wrong word. I should have said de-interlacing -- a process which still doesn't resolve to true 1920 x 1080.

Nope, it's not de-interlacing either. De-interlacing is as the name suggests the process of converting an interlaced signal to progressive. This is very confusing/misleading because DLP technology is inherently progressive. And yes it does display a true 1920x1080 image. It does it in two parts due wobulation not because of 720p/1080i format. Once TI comes out with a chip with enough mirrors it will display al 1920x1080 "pixels" at once.


Firstly, your previous page claim that 95% + of HDTV being 1080i is false. NBC, PBS and CBS use 1080i; FOX and ABC use 720p. Two major networks using 720p is hardly trivial and make up for more that 5% of the market.

I came up with 95% based on channels available in the Buffalo region. I pluged in the buffalo zip code at a site that spits out a list of broadcast towers with stations available in the area and 720p was very far and few in between the 1080i broadcasts. I don't have the link handy but you can find it through google.

Second, 720p produces a smother image than 1080i because at 1/30 of a second it's rendered two frames where 1080i has only rendered 1. It's that simple. More FPS at a lower resolution. So at 1/60 of a second:

1280 x 720 = 921,600
1920 x 1080 / 2 = 1,036,800

You are hung up on the fact that 1080i takes two passes to draw the full picture. The end result is still 2,073,600 "pixels" not 1,036,800 as you suggest. 720p may do two frames during the same time BUT and it's a big but it uses the same "pixels" both times which is less than half of 1080.

For 1080p - in this case we're actually taking about 1080p30, 30 full frames per second - two 1080i images are put together to make a whole one at 1/30 of a second. So how many pixels are being pushed in a second?

1280 x 720 x 60 full frames = ~55.3 Megapixels
1920 x 1080 x 30 full frames = ~62.2 Megapixels

Again, half of those 720p "pixel"s are duplicate so you have to divide by half if you are calculating resolution. That would give you ~27 vs 62.2. Yes you are pushing close to the same megapixels but still at less than half the resolution. You can't get away from that fact.

Is 1080p a better format? Certainly. But when you're dealing with a 1080i source material the advantage is only marginal. We can talk again when true 1080p30 or 1080p24 source material is available. :cheesygri

Some resources:

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6449_7-6361600-1.html

"Comparing a 50-inch 1080p DLP set to a 50-inch 720p DLP set, for example, he says you'll be hard-pressed to notice more detail with 1080i sources, especially from farther than 8 feet away. Even if you can see the difference, it will be much less obvious than, say, the difference between DVD and 720p HDTV."

This may be true on a 50" set. But we are talking about a 61" set and as I said before the bigger the screen the more noticable the difference will be.

"the main real-world advantage of 1080p is not the extra sharpness you'll be seeing, but instead, the smaller, more densely packed pixels. In other words, you can sit closer to a 1080p television and not notice any pixel structure, such as stair-stepping along diagonal lines, or screen door effect. This advantage applies regardless of the quality of the source."

I'm sorry but I don't agree with this. The pixels are packed just as densely in a 1080i picture as in a 1080p picture given the screen size is the same. I think sharpness and clearity is directly proportional with the number of pixels. It's hard to do a sharp image on a 60" screen with a few thousand pixels.

http://news.designtechnica.com/talkback47_page1.html

"What 720p excels at is temporal resolution—in our hypothetical horse race, you can see the horses’ legs move. What 1080i excels at is spatial resolution—when the picture is relatively static, you get more sharpness, assuming the signal source is good enough."

This is true and my arguement in this whole discussion is that spatial resolution is for me is more important than temporal resolution. The human brain has trouble keeping up with changes at 1/60 a second. But you can see the screen door effect very clearly which is due to low resolution.

[aw124]

FYI.
This week the price of the Panny dropped another $500 (MIR) :!:

($3399.99 + 15% ) - $500

Total damage: $3409.99


http://www2.panasonic.com/static//LargerPhoto/PT-60LCX64-B_Angle.jpg

[airodus]

awesome deal

is it the silver tv or the black one on page 1? i thought it was the black one (much nicer looking)

[George W. Bush]

You want a 1080p TV? Get this one:

Sceptre X37sv-Naga 37" / 1920 x 1080p / Built-in ATSC Tuner / 1000:1 Contrast Ratio / Detachable Speakers / Stand

http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1646852&CatId=386

It supports native 1080p!!!!

[sparrow_69]

aw124: How do you know that the price dropped another 500$ ?

[sparrow_69]

Airodus: Its the silver one

[vipernig]

I am going to have to back Synmag on all the techstuff.

Besides all TV signals are 30FPS and all movies are 24 FPS. And this is why you for a 720p TV @60Hz you will be getting 2 sames frames every 1/30 seconds. So for sport it shouldn't matter. The only difference is you might notice flickering or interlaced lines with 1080i. But this is for CRT and highly doudt that flickering occurs with DLP or LCD. The only time you might notice a difference in motion is if you are gaming with and xbox360 and the game is running at 60Hz. This wont be a problem for the PS3 because it will be outputing at 1080p.

Bottom line The best option is to buy 1080p if you are getting over 50" TV.

[Geese_Howard]

i bought the akai DLP for 1300 with stand, 46", very nice pick, once SED comes out and makes all other TV's obsolete, then I will invest heavy $$$ in a tv.

[lubmar]

Bottom line The best option is to buy 1080p if you are getting over 50" TV.

Did You see a front projector with a 120" screen ?
Only 720P but the picture ... !!!

[airodus]

Airodus: Its the silver one

Actually, I just googled it. It's this style and look:

http://www2.panasonic.com/static//LargerPhoto/PT-61LCX65_Angle_Rev.jpg

[sparrow_69]

Airodus: if you read my earlier posts, you'll see that I was mistaken as to the model #. The pic you are showing is of the newer model. The tv I was talking about, is the older style dlp, which is the silver one.

[tucker]

I checked out my local Costco, and it appears to be the "silver one." Unless other stores have different models, I'm pretty sure that this is a 60" LCD. It is still a very nice unit but I prefer the DLP picture to LCD.

[George W. Bush]

Anyone know whether I can use this TV to connect my computer to it and do stuff on it? Or should a Daytek 37" LCD do better (for $1850 right now at Costco.ca).

What are your suggestions?