It will be interesting to see the quality of pixel-processing on this model. In Japan, the 42" size is the most popular, so from a strictly marketing point of view, it makes more sense to release it to the Japanese market only, and not in the U.S. (we'd want a larger size screen). Resolution is really only half the issue with panels under 50". At CES in January, Pioneer showed their 1024x768p panel against Sony's Japan-market-only 1080p reference LCD, and all the press from various trades and online blogs I was with couldn't stop taking about how the Pioneer had much better detail than the double-the-resolution Sony. I've seen plenty of other tests conducted by other brands which prove that at typical viewing distances, no one can tell the difference between a 720p 42" and a 1080p 42". Where the differences become clear are in how each pixel driver process the source signal.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
It will be interesting to see the quality of pixel-processing on this model. In Japan, the 42" size is the most popular, so from a strictly marketing point of view, it makes more sense to release it to the Japanese market only, and not in the U.S. (we'd want a larger size screen). Resolution is really only half the issue with panels under 50". At CES in January, Pioneer showed their 1024x768p panel against Sony's Japan-market-only 1080p reference LCD, and all the press from various trades and online blogs I was with couldn't stop taking about how the Pioneer had much better detail than the double-the-resolution Sony. I've seen plenty of other tests conducted by other brands which prove that at typical viewing distances, no one can tell the difference between a 720p 42" and a 1080p 42". Where the differences become clear are in how each pixel driver process the source signal.