Updated 22 minutes ago

Panasonic predicts the death of direct LED TVs

Exclusive: Says tech too pricey, plasma and Edge LED the future?

September 6th 2010 | Tell us what you think [ 8 comments ]

panasonic-ifa-2010

Panasonic thinks the future belongs to plasma and Edge LED in the TV market

Direct LED TVs will soon disappear from the shelves and be replaced by cheaper Edge LED and plasma screens. That's according to Markus Wagenseil, Panasonic's technical marketing manager.

Speaking to TechRadar in Berlin last week, Wagenseil said that Direct LED technology is not viable and will be extinct within two years.

"For direct LED LCD we don't feel there is a market any more because the price pressure on TVs is incredibly high," he said.

"[There are so many more] LEDs that you need to mount in comparison to Edge LED, and anyway there are big shortages in LED production, so I don't think there is a market for direct LED."

Of course, this begged the question – if there's no market for Direct LED TVs, why are there so many coming out from the likes of LG and Philips?

"I would put it more the other way around," said Wagenseil, "more and more companies are dropping the concept. Edge LED is the way forward for the LCD market."

The Panasonic man also cast doubt on LCD's prospects for finally overhauling plasma in terms of picture quality.

"Comparing CCFL with Edge LED I think most people would agree that in terms of picture quality Edge LED is not a big gain. It was a gain in slimness and it was a gain in power consumption, but in terms of picture quality this technology has some serious disadvantages."

The riposte

Of course, it goes without saying that other TV manufacturers have a totally different opinion on the prospects of Direct LED's future as a viable technology.

Danny Tack, the mastermind behind much of Philips' LCD advances over the last few years, says that Direct LED is viable and has a future.

He told TechRadar that Direct LED tech will continue to be developed until it's possible to make TVs as slim as those using Edge LED.

"It is expensive, that's true. But it also makes a difference, so if you position yourself and develop it right you can find a compromise between cost and performance. And I strongly believe as Philips, where we have lots of direct LED products with quite a substantial amount of segments because that makes sense for the performance, that there is a market for it and we will continue so.

"For me the challenge is to get the Direct LED as thin as the edge-lit. We see that people are willing to pay for this kind of performance, so what we need to do now is combine that with the thin form-factor of edge-lit – keep the performance and make it thinner. And then direct LED will remain to exist."

What does it all mean?

It's not massively surprising that Philips is still keen on Direct LED - after all, it doesn't make any plasma screens at all and Direct LED represents the top-end in terms of LCD tech.

However, it is more surprising that Panasonic - which makes both LCD and plasma TVs - would condemn Direct LED so swiftly. Wagenseil refused to comment on whether Panasonic is going to change its strategy in terms of its LCD business, but if it doesn't see a future in Direct LED it's hard to see them persevering with the tech.

Wagenseil and Tack also both had some extremely interesting and contrasting views on the merits of plasma and LCD tech in terms of 3D performance, so check back soon for more on that.

 

Your comments (8) Click to add a new comment

mrdjmo


September 8th 2010

8. My LG 50" Plasma sucks about 190-230watts depending on what im watching.

That gives a guidline as to how power hungry plasma's are.

Alert a moderator

drunken_max


September 7th 2010

7. I really couldn't care less about the power consumption of my TV. I want quality first and foremost all round and Plasma gives me that. If it gets more green credentials then great.

I'll focus on my carbon footprint elsewhere, even if

I have to pay to offset it.

Alert a moderator

rimscar


September 7th 2010

6. after doing a comparethemeerkat exercise on all things LED and plasma, we plumped for a 46'' plasma from Panny, and athough the feature set is not well thought out, complicated and lacking it hoses from a great height on all but the most expensive Philips on picture quality and motion handling.

I detect motion judder very easily on screen, so that is a top priority over the thinness of the screen! :)

Shame i didn't wait a while for the new models released by Panny, but the market is a morass of confusion at the moment. Perhaps when Philips release their lenticular stuff in a few years time the market may settle a bit again....

Alert a moderator

lovlid


September 7th 2010

5. @ si_smith.

I doubt Panasonic just want to sell LCDs, seeing as they've taken on Pioneer's old Kuro plasma team.

@ grizzlybizzle.

LED is a form of backlight for LCDs, not a picture format.

Alert a moderator

wongkak


September 7th 2010

4. @si_smith - which 42in model tv do you have here. 110w is very low. I found most of the plasma 42in power consumption around 220w.

Alert a moderator

si_smith


September 6th 2010

3. @grizzlybizzle Sorry, you fell for the pro-LCD marketing hype.

There is little difference between a modern Gen4 or later Plasma and a TFT. Let me explain the difference.

A TFT has a very power-hungry and VERY bright backlight and uses the LCD to black out pixels to make darks (which is why you never get blacks on a TFT, just dark greys).

A Plasma only lights the pixels it needs.

In other words, a Plasma will have very high consumption on bright white images, and very low consumption on dark images, and at the end of the day it all averages out. A TFT will draw the same power consumtion regardless of picture content, as the backlight has to remain on for everything.

My 42in Panasonic Plasma draws about 110w, which is pretty comparible with a 42in TFT.

Alert a moderator

grizzlybizzle


September 6th 2010

2. @si_smith - Plasma TVs are also massively energy hungry. LED, once perfected, will have an equal or better image quality and a much lower carbon footprint. It's win-win all round with LED technology.

Alert a moderator

si_smith


September 6th 2010

1. The bottom line is this. Plasma TV's offer the best picture quality and all-round performance. However manufacturers don't want us to buy those, they want us to buy LCD based televisions (LED/TFT) because they are cheap as chips to make, and the markups are HUGE. This is why the stores are stuffed with them.

Alert a moderator

Tell us what you think

You need to Log in or register to post comments

By submitting this form you agree to our Terms of Use and so are legally responsible for anything you submit. DO NOT submit anything which may violate the Terms of Use or another person's rights including copyrighted or offensive materials.

LG's 55-inch EM9600 OLED TV will be sold during 2012

OLED TV: what you need to know

OLED TV prices, manufacturers and more

Choose the best TV for you!

Best TV 2012: what TV should you buy this year?

Best LCD TVs and plasma TVs reviewed

The Toshiba 55ZL2 is the first 4K consumer TV announced. It uses the extra resolution to create glasses-free 3D

4K TV resolution: what you need to know

What is 4K, why is it significant and when can you get it?

Which is the best 32-inch LCD TV?

10 best 32-inch LCD TVs in the world today

Let us help you choose the best 32-inch LCD TV