If you look at the list of plasma HDTV reviews on C|Net, the top TVs are virtually all Pioneer or Panasonic, with the occasional Samsung in there. It seems that they don't have any official reviews of Phillips plasmas, though, but the customer ratings are generally much lower.

http://reviews.cnet.com/4360-6482_7-6595336.html?fOrder=500963&500963=7809300&key=philips_tvs#dffl_top

 

Model 50PF9731D 

Again, I can't find any official reviews of the product, but other reviews I've read of Phillips plasma panels have mildly criticized the black level. Here is a link that may be of use:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=a9a9e53cc100aa1e4e763ab6d92b709e&t=784621

In any case, if you can find a Panasonic at a comparable price, I would recommend you go with that instead.

 

EDIT:  Also, this whole "Ambilight" thing kind of scares me, but I'm sure it can be disabled. 

I would go with a Samsung.

GooseGaws said: Plasmas have better response times, wider viewing angles, better color reproduction, and most importantly, better black levels. There is a slight risk of burn-in, but only if a static image is left on-screen for weeks at a time. Also, the screen can reflect glare under some circumstances. LCDs have no glare and basically no risk of burn-in. They consume less power and are usually a bit lighter and slightly less thick. EDIT: Plasmas function best in an environment where the light can be reduced during use. If the room is consistently bright during use, LCD may be a better choice.

A good choice to reduce glare also is to buy CFL soft white, lightbulbs I use them in my room and they're much more forgiving with plasma and LCD alike. As far as black levels on LCD's they've gotten a LOT better in the past few years. A good samsung or sony LCD can manage 93%+ of the NTSC colors up untill a year ago it was more like 78% and viewing angles on most -good- lcd's is 178 degrees which is about what any plasma would really offer you. Years ago LCD's had like 80 degree viewing angles but it's not a problem anymore. One of the main factors is gonna be the pixel pitch, the bigger the pitch the further the pixels are from eachother(it's only mm's) but Vizios have a much higher pixel pitch(not good) than samsung or sony which will affect viewing if you sit either close or far away however at the optimal range for the TV there should be little difference(except certain things may seem a bit more jagged) In TV size, remember bigger is not always better. When buying a TV think about the size of your room and average viewing range. If the average viewing range is 4-8' than you want a 32"-37" screen. It will definatly be optimal to choose this way. If you get a TV that's too large for the range your normally view at it may not look as good as it could.

I have a Vizio and love it. 32 inch 720p/1080i and it cost me less than my PS3. Vizio is a good buy for your money. That's their business plan; To be better than the Maxents and Westinghouse but not as expensive as the Samsungs and Sonys.

The problems you'd notice with a Vizio are non-HD. The 480i TV broadcasts look worse than a 480i CRT. Also the sound isnt great, but if you are going HD you should have surround and a separate receiver. I also wouldnt buy a Vizio LCD larger than 32 inches. Many people forget that a 32 inch TV 1080p is the same resolution as a 42 inch 1080p TV, meaning the pixels are physically larger on the 42 inch, and only Samsung and Sony handle the extra size well enough to bring the same image quality that a smaller tv would have.

In conclusion my recommendation is that if you go for a premium brand, grab a Samsung or Sony. Dont go for the other premium brands like Panasonic, or Sharp because they dont have the same image quality and the savings are meager. If you decide that saving a little coin is what you want ONLY get a Vizio, the other economy brands SUCK, but Vizio is cheap and will get you an HD video that is close or equal to the Samsung and Sony.

Okay, let me put it this way guys:

I'm not a person that's likely to notice slight differences in picture quality. As such I am NOT looking for "the absolute best," and I'm simply not willing to pay a 200+ dollar premium for a Sony or Samsung because the difference just isn't noticable to me and I don't care enough.

In other words, I'm looking to get a great-but-not-the-best television. I'm spending 1000-1400 dollars and I'm willing to look at any brand. Does that help narrow down this search? Because I think a lot of people here are recommending the absolute best of the best, and I'm going to be honest, I simply cannot tell the difference between the absolute best and the second best (or put more generally, I CAN see the difference between standard definition and 720p, but I simply cant see much if any difference between 1080p and 720p).  

Bodhesatva said: Okay, let me put it this way guys: I'm not a person that's likely to notice slight differences in picture quality. As such I am NOT looking for "the absolute best," and I'm simply not willing to pay a 200+ dollar premium for a Sony or Samsung because the difference just isn't noticable to me and I don't care enough. In other words, I'm looking to get a great-but-not-the-best television. I'm spending 1000-1400 dollars and I'm willing to look at any brand. Does that help narrow down this search? Because I think a lot of people here are recommending the absolute best of the best, and I'm going to be honest, I simply cannot tell the difference between the absolute best and the second best (or put more generally, I CAN see the difference between standard definition and 720p, but I simply cant see much if any difference between 1080p and 720p).

you can get a good 32" samsung for under 1000USD pretty easily..

But I'd rather have a larger television (I have a big living room). Size is probably my largest issue here.

 

Again guys, having just spent a few hours scouring the internet investigating, it's clear that Samsun and Sony lead the LCD market, with Pioneer and Panasonic ahead in Plasmas. It looks like these views are warranted.

But I am NOT an afficianado. Many of the reviews said things like: "For the visual fanatics out there, accept no substitute," or "Panasonic and Pioneer are the elite manufacturers." What this suggests to me is that, as someone who is NON-elite and NOT a visual fanatic, most of the qualities that put Samsung/Panasonic on top are just not going to be things I personally notice.

So, with that in mind, what brand is best for me?  

Okay, here's a simple way to put it: it looks like some televisions offer 90-95 percent of the picture quality of a Samsung while only costing 70% as much. THAT is what I want.