|
||||||||
Panasonic TH-37PX70B |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26
|
Panasonic TH-37PX70B
A few weeks ago I was looking into which HDTV to buy and I decided on the Panasonic TH-37PX70. Now I've got the money together and want to buy one I've noticed that some sites aren't selling the TH-37PX70, they're selling the TH-37PX70B. Is this the new model? If so, how good is it? I can't find any information about the TH-37PX70B on Panasonic's website at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,207
|
The B means it's the UK spec model. Most places don't bother to add the B to end as it makes little difference to them. However if you are buying online make sure its a B model as imports could cause problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 107
|
Quote:
A few weeks ago I was looking into which HDTV to buy and I decided on the Panasonic TH-37PX70. Now I've got the money together and want to buy one I've noticed that some sites aren't selling the TH-37PX70, they're selling the TH-37PX70B. Is this the new model? If so, how good is it? I can't find any information about the TH-37PX70B on Panasonic's website at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,052
|
I’m thinking of upgrading my 26” Samsung LCD tv to the Panasonic TH37PX70B Plasma TV.
Does anyone have this TV? Is it any good? – My main concern is picture sharpness- The Samsung LCD is not only a smaller screen but is obviously an LCD which are supposed to give sharper pics- whats its like on the Panasonic? Also, how does digital TV like sky and freeview fair? - my front room is quite small but would accommodate a 37” screen without it looking stupid- the main viewing positions are around 4 metres away, do pixels show at that distance? |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Bristol
Posts: 1,016
|
At that distance, you will never notice the difference between a 1024x768 panel (which the Panasonic is) and one with a greater number of pixels.
Chip |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 16,680
|
We have last years model - the 37 PX 60 - and have used it for 14 months with Sky Hd.
It is excellent. I imagine rthe 2007 version is much the same. It combined the best of HD with the best SD pictures. Last year we could not find an LCD to touch it for SD picture quality. 37 was the largest screen we wanted for the viewing distance we have. We have had no regrets. And it is now a lot cheaper than it was in May 2006!¬ |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,441
|
What, if any, is the difference between a PX70 and a PX700, aside from price?
Also, I see there is now a PZ700 model which is full HD. Would I be right in saying that there is little point in blowing the extra cash for full HD given that most broadcast output isn't in full HD? Or not? Also I noticed that the PX700 has a contrast ration of 10000:1 whereas the PZ700 is 5000:1. My understanding was that the higher the ration the better. Or does the full HD compensate/cure contrast issues so it doesn't need to be so high? I spotted a PX700 at john lewis for £1399. Is that about right? |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 16,680
|
If I understand rightly the 70 and 700 models are thre same so far as picture quality etc (it was true of the 60/600) But the extra dosh for the 700 brings greater connectivity, making it essential if you play games or link computers. There may be extra tinkering functions as well.
For TV use the 60 was cheaper and just as good for us as they were essentially the same set. But someone more knowledgeable can probably say more or correct me if I am wrong. No TV channel transmits in 1080 p (Sky uses 1080 i) and are unlikely to do so any time soon. I was told that at 37 inches you will never spot the difference in PQ. With larger screen sizes you might. If you use full HD computer/video games it might make a difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,441
|
I'll certainly be wanting to connect a PS3 or Xbox 360 so the additional connectivty is important.
Sounds like a visit to John lewis for the PX700 then. Thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,207
|
The px700 also has much better sound quality. We have the 50pz700 sat next to the 42px700 at work and i have to say the image is much better on the pz700. The screen seems to give deeper blacks than the px and looks bright and clear. The px seems to be washed out in comparison which is a shame. Just as a side not a pz70 may be out soon. A full1080p screen with stripped out features like the px70!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 16,680
|
Any idea of prices for a full 1080 p Pz 70?
Might be tempted to upgrade if the PQ is even better than with the PX 60. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 2,163
|
J Lewis lists the 42PZ70 at £1500. (In the LCD section
Since they list the 42PX700 at £1400, (which can be easily found elsewhere at £1100-1200,) it suggests a "street price" of around £1300 for the PZ70 However the differential between a PX70 and PX700 seems to be around £200 and the PZ700 is currently around £1800-1900 mark so I would suggest that JL will probably increase the price in due course to around £1800 and the PZ70's competitive price will be around £1500-1600. In short - I don't really know
Last edited by hardeep : 28-07-2007 at 20:18. Reason: spelling |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Bristol
Posts: 1,016
|
Quote:
Also I noticed that the PX700 has a contrast ration of 10000:1 whereas the PZ700 is 5000:1. My understanding was that the higher the ration the better. Or does the full HD compensate/cure contrast issues so it doesn't need to be so high?
(Of course its debatable how you would go about measuring this. Do you take a pure white screen, measure it, then a pure black screen & measure that? Or do you take a black and white image and measure the white parts and the black parts? Or do you do something else entirely? That's why different manufacturers claiming different contrast ratios doesn't really tell you much.) Anyway, as I understand it, the black level performance on the PZ range is about the same as on the PX's. But since the pixels are much smaller on the PZ, it can't go quite as bright, which means the contrast ratio isn't as high on the PZ. Does this matter? Well it depends where and what you watch. Watching movies in a darkish room, no it won't matter at all. Watching football in a bright living room on a sunny day? Then it might. Depends on what you want. Also, don't get too hung up about the number of pixels. Unless you are watching from less then 3 or 4 feet away, you are not really going to notice the difference between 1024x768 and 1920x1080 on a 42" or smaller screen. If you have a PC then have a play around to see what I mean. Download some HD content from microsoft (or wherever) and watch it with your screen set resolution set to (say) 1020x768 and then play the same clip at (say) 1280x1024, both from maybe 2 feet from the screen. Tell the difference? I doubt it. Chip |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,441
|
Thanks for the answers everyone.
Chip - I read after I posted that the contrast ratio value is NOT an industry standard to measure by. That's somewhat misleading considering most internet tv outlets list it as "standard" specification value on their specifications page without any hint that it can be a bit variable. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Derbyshire
Posts: 41,794
|
Quote:
That's somewhat misleading considering most internet tv outlets list it as "standard" specification value on their specifications page without any hint that it can be a bit variable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,441
|
Quote:
A 'bit' is rather hopeful?, it varies massively, with some manufacturers claiming 4 or 5 times the contrast ratio for identical panels. Ignore the specs, go and look at them and see which YOU like.
Sorry, I couldn't find appropriate tags for "a bit". Something like [sarcasm] a bit [/sarcasm] would have been about right! AND LESS OF THE SHOUTING PLEASE NIGEL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Bristol
Posts: 1,016
|
Quote:
A 'bit' is rather hopeful?, it varies massively, with some manufacturers claiming 4 or 5 times the contrast ratio for identical panels. Ignore the specs, go and look at them and see which YOU like.
And bear in mind that a higher contrast ratio achieved with better black level is far far far better (3 fars) than one achieved by higher brightness. All modern panels - plasma or LCD - will go plenty bright enough unless you want to watch outdoors or in some bizarre lighting environment. The problem is, many (all?) of the LCD manufacturers keep increasing the maximum brightness level and therefore the contrast ratio keeps going up. But it doesn't mean the black level is coming down and the pictures are too bright anyway, so what extra does more brightness give you. My advice to anyone testing out a new TV is to make sure you see what it looks like in a dimly lit room, not a brightly lit shop. Many LCD's look great in the shop, but get them in a darkish living room and their complete inability to render a decent black makes them far less appealing. Chip |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,506
|
Amazon are currently advertising the TH-37PX70 at £450 which seems incredibly cheap. What's the catch?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Bristol
Posts: 1,016
|
Quote:
Amazon are currently advertising the TH-37PX70 at £450 which seems incredibly cheap. What's the catch?
Chip |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,506
|
Quote:
I don't know where you saw that. I would buy one in an *instant* at that price. Just checked Amazon (UK) and the lowest price is £620 plus £30 delivery.
Chip I'm sure the £450 page is somewhere in my IE cache - not that it would prove anything. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 17:09.

