Panasonic Delivers World's First LIFI HDTV

[Shane]

Panasonic has started to ship a new line of High Definition LCD Rear Projection Display televisions featuring the revolutionary long-life LIFI(TM), a first-of-its kind light fidelity projection display application that ensures image brightness over an extended period of time as well as greatly reduced start-up time. The Panasonic LIFI High Definition line includes two series - the LCZ and LCX. The LCZ series, available in three large-screen screen sizes, 61-inches, 56-inches and 50- inches, feature 1080p resolution and an elegant glossy black finish with a new floating panel design. The PT-61LCX70 and PT-56LCX70 offer 720p resolution.

By converting HID (High Intensity Discharge) lamps to LIFI, the models enjoy an especially long life span with incredible brightness. When the electrodes in HID lamps deteriorate...

[url=http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/news/2007/08/panasonic_deliv.php]Read the Full Article[/url]

[HD Addict]

Thankfully, the days of 5-8,000 hr. lamps @ $300 a shot are over. It will be interesting to see what effect this will have on Sony's sales, but no doubt they will now have a comparable arrangement which has no doubt been sitting in the wings all these years. I've always wondered how Sharp could use 60,000 hr. lamps while Sony were quite content to tolerate the lucrative >$300 lamps. Thank you Panasonic and Sharp for your kind consideration.

[Richard]

[quote]I've always wondered how Sharp could use 60,000 hr. lamps [/quote]
On what? Not an arc lamp. That sounds like the backlighting on a LCD flat panel. This article is about LCD projection...

[HD Addict]

Sorry, I completely overlooked the point that Sharp used backlighting instead of a lamp, but the fact remains that if Sharp chose to go that route, even though it meant no residual returns, then it begs the question why then don't others ?

[Richard]

seems you are missing an engineering thingy here...

Backlighting an LCD panel is a different animal than a lamp in a projector... Think of mini flourescent looking tubes spaced out behind a very large screen, LCD flat panel, versus a single light canon with a 2-3 inch opening, arc lamp, striking a 1"X2" microdisplay that is blown up to fill out a very large screen. Not even remotely the same...

[HD Addict]

I realise that, but the point I am making is that there are many ways to "skin the cat". Which raises the question of why certain manufacturers opted for the approach that brings in future residuals rather than the approach taken by others that don't. When I purchased the Sony GWII in 2003 from a Sony Store, I was unaware of the "lamp" until I read the manual. Four years later when I see the alternatives that are now available on the market, I doubt very much if I will ever buy another Sony HDTV, for the "lamp" factor has made a radical change in the way I now watch TV and that is after 54 years of never having to even consider having to periodically replace a "lamp". Remember too, four years ago there was very little edification around for the prospective buyer. My 12 year old 50" Hitachi RPTV is still the standby for standard TV viewing, but don't get me wrong, the GWII has given me hours of wondrous entertainment, but only because of the judicious use of viewing selective HD content. As additional HD channels come on the scene, I'll no doubt consider yet another HCTV set, since there will be more to watch on HD than on SD, but because of the additional use I can guarantee there'll be no "lamp" involved.

[Richard]

[quote]I realise that, but the point I am making is that there are many ways to "skin the cat". Which raises the question of why certain manufacturers opted for the approach that brings in future residuals rather than the approach taken by others that don't.[/quote]
Your evil corporate conspiracy for profits probably makes good print for the general public and sales for general rags but it would be grossly false...

Projection has been lamp based for decades, starting with candles... The only other form since the 70's is CRT projection but it never put out enough light for large screens over 85". Lamp based projection is simple and easy to design as well as proven in the field. Lamps used to be $400-600 (some are still up there) and that was the first challenge for mass market manufacturers; get that price cut in half. While they managed to successfully do that complaints like yours and the reality of the mass market from how consumers use displays to the environments they put them in dictated finding another solution.

Samsung is using LED, Mitsubishi is working on laser, and out of the blue comes this announcement from Panasonic, first I heard that they too were working on another solution. How useful all this will be is questionable as the world of retail goes all flat within the next two years. Maybe they have their eyes set on the front projection market...

A performance note: While the Samsung LED has been successful for casual viewers upset with lamp replacement the videophile community is recommending their lamp based versions for performance...

[HD Addict]

Oh, please spare me the tired and worn "conspiracy theory" accusation, for one, the word "conspiracy" implies more than one involved, and I am talking here specifically of Sony, and it is well to remember that profit is the salient factor in any commercial enterprise, to which you yourself can no doubt attest. Even the dogs in the street are aware of the financial difficulties Sony were experiencing and so it comes as no surprise that any way they could enhance their revenues would be front and foremost in their marketing strategies and the "lamp" was no doubt judged to be the way to accomplish it. When I bought a standby lamp to keep in reserve four years ago because they were then on a two month back order, and who would want to be without their HDTV for two months, I was told by The Sony Store that as more and more of their HDTV sets were sold, the price of the lamps would decrease. Well, four years later and the price has remained solidly the same.

I would have to be the first to confess that my experience with the lamp has indeed coloured my low regard both for the lamp and Sony. When I eventually tested the $300 standby lamp, when the thought entered my mind that I didn't even know whether it would work should the worst happen to the lamp that came with the GWII, it wrecked the lamp driver and I was hit with a $800 repair bill since it was now seven months out of warranty. It wasn't that so much that had the adverse effect on me, it was the way Sony defended their authorised service to charge me the $800 to install a $260 part. Now you have a conspiracy ..... for profit !

[jamescouch2]

Your post is something that I really like the most. You have definitely chosen to publicize it and no wonder along with your idea it is also great.