Panasonic's 152-inch 4K-resolution 3D plasma ships this fall
By Richard Lawler 
posted June 9th 2010 3:51AM
posted June 9th 2010 3:51AM
posted June 9th 2010 3:51AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
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.
Being rich has it's perks
My dreams of a 4K 3DTV has finally come true, now once I too become rich and buy this beast I can die happy [=
@abedinthehouse Give it 3 months and they'll have a 153-inch model that will make your life incomplete again...
@MrFluffyThing Tell me about it, I'm already getting a crew together to get rid of my 151-inch. Being rich is so hard.
It took more than 50 years to get from PAL/NTSC to HDTV.
Now we have these gigantic screens and we start with pixely TV all over again. *sigh*
@SeeKo
Isn't that why it's a 4k screen?
@DougieBear
You're right. Pixely was the wrong word. Put it will be blurry again.
@xtasi
Meh, with a pixel density of 30.46472916 - I'm disappointed, extremely. Anything less than 4K would be majorly unwatchable.
To be quite honest in a day when you can buy a smartphone with almost 300 more pixels in every single inch, this is just pathetic.
for his next trick, Mr Jobs will be fitting this resolution into the ipad 2
Nerdgasm!!!!!
cool, now you can see even more zits in hi-def pr0n!
@Psyclotr0n We call them nirples in the biz. Now we can have larger than life p0rn with these giant nirples.
4K Blu-Ray?
Or an OC-3 piped into your home?
Wow, can u imagine halo reach on that?!?! In 3D to boot lol....but I rather buy a house, beach house, viper, dirtbike, and a iPhone 4 haha had to add that last one for kicks. But man thats a beast tv
@creezy8188 lol @ halo reach fail at taking advantage of even 720p, let alone 4k resolution...
This Is designed for the rich
@coolduder1
Or for corporate rentals...
@coolduder1
This is designed to be a showcase technology piece for a trade show, and nothing more. They'll probably special order some for the uber-wealthy and for a few corporations, but that is about all.
i'd rather have one without the whole 3d thing
@mrqs You don't have to watch everything in 3D. You can turn it on an off.
@Nebken and*
@Nebken
wouldn't be as pricy tho'... granted i still couldn't afford one
@mrqs It would still cost the same. It's mostly in the software anyways. I'd buy a Maserati over this any day of the week.
i just had an eye-gasm, put this in a box and send it to me [probably will have to pay a crate fee] and ill have a die-gasm.
What can I say? This is the cliche TV for a man who doesn't know what to do with all that money.
Pure awesomeness. I can only dream of every owning one of these. Time for another medium upgrade, blu-ray is dead. I think these discs should be enough to hold a 4K movie: http://www.engadget.com/2005/04/18/inphase-announces-300gb-holographic-discs/
I'm wondering about the power consumption? 300watts?
@truman I'm thinking 1kw plus!
@SlimSpaceman 1.21 gigawatts
if they sell more than 100 they'll be lucky
@DeviantmacG if they sell more than 100, they will 50.000.000+ cashflow :)
Debbie does Dallas the Basketball remake. Is the only reason mark is buying this
Might as well buy a projector,i wonders how much power it consumes certainly in 4 digit numbers.
@aim120 the thing is that the quality of a projection is way lower than one from a TV, still that thing will cost a bizilion dollars, if you can buy it you can pay your electricity bills
@Alv
The quality of a $100,000+ projector and the remaining $400,000 or so to build your own home theater will blow away this TV. It isn't even close.
Think about it. When was the last time you went out to a movie and thought to yourself, "wow, this would look so much better on a TV". If you want to be immersed in the action, then you want a dark, dark room. At that point the brightness of the TV is too much. If you have ever used front projection, then you know that in a properly darkened room you turn down the light output of the projector anyway.
If all you want to do it watch sports on it in a brightly lit room, then I guess you can make a case for the TV.
I think its a bit to expensive.. Anyone know the reolution needed for it to max out the eye?
@Nimer55 It all depends on how far away you are. You'll likely sit at least 20 feet away, would would pretty much guarantee it's better quality than your eye can see, though I don't feel like pulling out a calculator.
WOW POINTLESS!
Plasma is a technology that is becoming less relevant these days too.
@tom902
Well there's an ignorant post. Plasma still owns LCD in every visual category (color, response time, contrast, motion resolution). And plasma has managed to stay ahead of LCD (even with LCD's improvements in contrast and blur).
Until OLED takes hold, plasma is still gonna be the best flat panel tech. Emissive beats transmissive any day.
@tom902 WOW - what a strange comment. A friend of mine just asked me about what the best TVs are. I gave him the top 3 including a Panasonic with deep blacks. He went to a couple of places that carried the different models and saw the Panasonic side by side with the one of the others at each place and chose the Panasonic despite the price. His comment was that the action movies on the LED and LCD gave him motion sickness. The LCD was brighter but he didn't care since he watches TV with the blinds closed.
Me likes.
I want one as a secondary monitor. That's right my 24" will be the primary and this one I'll only use to have movies playing in the background LOL
OR you can just buy a 3D projector for $1000
@jediknight999
resolution comprehension fail
@TheRealMikeyG
Where did he fail? This is 4k resolution. They also sell 4K projectors for a fraction of the price of this plasma...
Cool, now I just have to build my house around it.
The house would probably cost less than the display...
Being a Plasma, It will be warmer than the suns surface in the house. Hey, you won't be needing central heating!
@DaftVader
Have you been saving that comment since 2004? Because that's about the time frame that it would have been accurate.
Coronation street on this whoop
Wouldn't 4096x2160 be 2K? Like 1920x1080 is 1K (or 1080p)?