Hitachi's 1.5 UltraThin LCD HDTVs now available in US

You heard it right -- Hitachi's UltraThin 1.5 family that caused such a stir at CES is finally available for US consumers. Available in 32-, 37-, 42- and 47-inch sizes, the lot has been broken down into two distinct clans: the Director's Series (X) and Ultra Vision (V) models. Each member of the former comes with a 2-year warranty and a sticker ranging from $1,999 to $4,699, while the latter gets a 1-year warranty and price tags between $1,799 and $4,499. Curiously enough, it seems that several sets (the UT47X902, UT47V702, UT32A302/W, UT32V502/W, UT42V702 and UT37V702) may actually not yet be ready for shipping judging by their July to September availability dates, but we'll leave it to you to sort out the contradictions in Hitachi's press release with your dealer. Hit the read link for more details, and hop on over to Engadget HD for a gallery of press shots.

[Rob Conway @ May 1st 2008 6:57PM]

I'm pretentious and irritating! (not the tv, just me)

[Lein @ May 1st 2008 7:08PM]

What is the point of these stupidly-thin displays if you're always looking at the front of it?

[alexmueller @ May 1st 2008 7:27PM]

the point is lighter, and more flush with the wall when you wall mount it

[Aguiluz @ May 1st 2008 7:47PM]

I kinda agree with Lein. I don't care if my LCD is fat, I just want it working and wall mountable. And, with a big screen to look at, I can care less of the thinness of the screen.

Nice avatar btw.

[FoxHoundADAM @ May 1st 2008 9:53PM]

Agreed. I don't know why they don't focus on cutting out all the flashing on the sides. It would help people like me who are limited to the TV sive they can use in their entertainment center, not to mention it would look sweet just to have a screen almost free floating.

[connor @ May 1st 2008 10:41PM]

i think its all about your living space. This would be good if you have a small pad and it is in a place, such as a wall, where it can be seen from the side. If you have more space and it really can't be seen then what's the point?

[Tim Brown @ May 2nd 2008 7:04AM]

Also, thinner means less weight. For people with walls made out of plaster board, you dont have to spend your time worrying if your £2000 purchase is going to end as a £2000 pile of scrap at the foot of the wall.

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ May 2nd 2008 7:53PM]

I agree, picture quality should matter more than the thickness. What's the point to having a beautiful looking TV when turned off, only to tune it on and produce a poor quality picture? Pioneer Kuro for the all out win.

[Jtmonkey @ May 2nd 2008 2:13AM]

umm, so this has been on an end cap display at my best buy for almost two weeks. Way to go.

[rayw @ May 1st 2008 7:11PM]

I was never a great fan of LCDs. Bring on the Kuro 9mm plasmas - now *that* is thin.

[andres @ May 1st 2008 7:20PM]

i thought plasmas were dead

[rayw @ May 1st 2008 7:31PM]

- "The New Black"
- Much wider viewing angle than LCD
- No picture juddering (*most* LCDs still have this problem and I'm very picky)
- Colour saturation and depth

= Not dead until these are fixed, or Sony starts manufacturing their OLEDs in a decent size.

[mac404 @ May 1st 2008 8:15PM]

If you look hard enough, "most" plasmas also have some of the problems you listed, especially with juddering. As far as I can tell, it's a refresh-rate problem, not a technological one (these top two sizes at least refresh at 120Hz, which means that 24fps and 30fps sources are displayed without problems) .Viewing angles on LCD's are more than adequate for everyone I know, and the color gamut "problem" can be mitigated with an LED-backlit LCD.

Basically, the problems you're spouting are not really related to this specific set of LCD's (except maybe in the color gamut, I am really not sure how well their dynamic contrast algorithms work), you just want to complain because your favorite kind of TV is going out of style. Plasmas can never overcome higher weights and power consumption. LCD has continued to improve as a technology (and LED's have made for higher-contrast and more efficient backlighting). You can claim to be a snob who notices subtle differences, but these tv's are still damn cool.

[Brad @ May 1st 2008 9:24PM]

What kind of specs are you thinking Plasmas have that LCDs don't?

Here's my LCD's spec:
52", 1080P
4ms refresh, 120hz display
50,000:1 contrast ratio
178 degree viewing angles (up/down, left/right)
92% NTSC color gamut (more with opt. LED backlight)
Samsung LN52A650

So tell me again how these plasmas, the ones that nearly every manufacturer has stopped making, are better? They cost more and don't perform as well.

[rayw @ May 2nd 2008 10:23AM]

Sorry, replied to you below.

[Jack Storm @ May 2nd 2008 6:41PM]

@ Brad

what optional LED backlight do you speak about? dont think you can just add LED on a tv that doesnt have it. do you mean the 81 samsung models? so far the lnt5281 is the only 52" LED backlight model from samsung.

the 6 series samsung is a great lcd, but no match for a kuros. though the style of the 7 series alone makes me think about getting it just for my xbox360.

[owl @ May 1st 2008 7:28PM]

Finally! I have been waiting for these things. I never understood people's obsession with image quality in regards to displays. I just want them thinner!!

-owl

[w00t @ May 1st 2008 8:36PM]

Mmm I got a semi just looking at it!

[webon @ May 1st 2008 9:26PM]

where are the >50 in??

[Kinger @ May 1st 2008 9:51PM]

O to the L to the E to the D

sorry, not thin enough Hitch

[HalfJoey @ May 1st 2008 10:32PM]

Maybe they should focus on picture quality and not how thin they can make them. I think focusing on thin displays is stupid when LCDs still get motion blur without the 120Hz garbage feature and back light is still an issue.

[Mario @ May 2nd 2008 12:40AM]

I just put this TV on display 4 days ago at my BBY. Looks nice!!

[rayw @ May 2nd 2008 12:53AM]

@Brad (and I guess the rest in a small way)

You're very fortunate to own a very wonderful LCD (one of the best?) if you have one of those new Samsungs. I don't. I do have a few high quality flat panels at home though, and the LCD vs. Plasma side-by-side is much more favourable towards the realism and viewing angle of the plasma screen. Is it subjective? Of course it is. On pure specifications, one car may appear much better on paper - in reality the reverse may be true. I normally go to the shops and see for myself, and since I do know the salesperson, they're nice enough to let me play anything simultaneously on all the screens in store.

Here's a review: http://hometheatermag.com/lcds/1207sam5281/

On page two, there's a comparison to a Kuro PDP-6010FD plasma which the reviewer had side-by-side.

N.B. Whilst a large viewing angle may not be an issue to some, it is definitely a requirement for me, due to the layout of the living/dining area. I'm not talking about the specifications "on paper" - a 178deg angle is quite wide, but the fade starts happening a lot sooner than that. Sorry if I come across as a "snob" that is just "spouting".

I won't convince you here obviously, so I'll simply go on deluding myself...

[still.reprise @ May 2nd 2008 1:33AM]

We just put the 37" Director's series out on display. It's a nice thin set and the back is nice and clean. One of the ideas behind it is that in an open floorplan you can put it on a table in the middle of a living area and it's relatively unobtrusive.

The issues with the set are as follows: poor black levels (yay LCDs!), it's $3k, and it only has HDMI and a single PC input. Not even component.

And a note to Brad above: you obviously haven't been doing your research on plasmas. Ignore contrast ratio, it's all marketing BS. Plasma's trump LCD's on black levels, (accurate) color rendition, response time (less than 1ms on Pioneer and Panasonic) and are for the most part cheaper than LCDs.