"Con: power, rendering, colors, overpriced, connectivity"2.0 starson by verdyp
Pros: not any advantage.
Cons: Con: power usage, average image (bad colors, blurry, visible pixel geometry), overpriced, poor connectivity.
Summary: I don't understand why the editor places Panasonic as the best manufacturer. This looks like irrational. Today, you'll want good colors, excellent shadows, excellent unwashed contrasts (correct gamma), and even more importantly, excellent codecs that will make the image crisp and not blurry, even when looking at non HD sources.
And here, Philips and Samsung are largely superior for how images are managed: you can even look at the image from very near, you'll see the tiniest hair on people's head, you'll see non flashing letters for subtitles or images of moving texts. you'll get an excellent 3D effect just by subtle shadows that improve the view depth. And for color fidelity, Panasonic lags far behind (in fact it does not own any technology, it just sublicences some of them).
Looking at the connectivyty, yes you've got 4 HDMI, but competitors have them too, plus many more for compatibility with other devices.
And look at the configuration and navigation menus: Panasonic models are really deceptive.
Finally why a plasma if it does not even give any advantage in terms of contrast, frefresh rate, color fidelity, and image crisp ? It will just use too much power, will cost you more.
Today's LCD technologies are doing much better : the decreased cost for the panel itself, allows also the TV set to embed better numeric technologies for image rendering (notably for interpolation, autoadaptation of image formats, personalized zoom (between pan-scan and letterbox) levels, autodaptation to ambiant light, faster processors for handling more complex codecs on personal medias (USB disk, remote media server, digital cameras, memory sticks/flash cards).
It will also allow better autocorrection from digital broadcasts, faster zapping of TV channels, better audio processing.
In addition, LCD technologies allow now thinner subpixels, and now as well new subpixels geometries with more color planes for better rendering of yellow-greens, as well as better contrasts for black-grays-white, as well as better adaptation to other color models for gamma correction according to user preferences (even if it's at the price of color fidelity : most users don't care much about exact fidelity, what they want is their prefered white temperature, and autoadaptation with ambiant light, keeping the apparent shadows and contrasts still very subtle, distinctive and crisp).
Plasmas don't have any advantage today. You'll pay more to have it, but all other components have been sacrificed ; and you'll pay the energy bill !
My choice still go now to Philips (for its excellent image processing and autocorrection algorithms from various unreliable numeric sources like broadcasts) and Samsung for the excellence of its connectivity, ease of use (menus), and (in the high-end segment) for its excellent panels (they have the widest and most precise color gammut in their new subpixel geometries featuring color model transforms to escape from the traditional YCbCr->sRGB model and vertically striped 3 pixels that have undesirable anisotropic effects very visible on animated objects or diagonals and undesirable color fringing that can only be compensated by gaussian blurring which reduce the crispnesn of textures).
Also, I will ignore the comments about 3D imagery. I will NEVER look at a TV with 3D glasses. And in fact the current broadcasting technologies are offering pseudo-3D (dual-image) at the price of the reduction in pixel density (lightness), the reduction of contrasts, very poor whites, very poor color fidelity, and reduced angle for correct vision of the display. And I can't bear 3D glasses with my vision glasses. 3D is an unnecessary gadget. You get better 3D reconstruction in your brain from an excellent image with excellent shadows. In addition ,there are almost no sources of 3D available (those that exist today are artificially built from existing 2D, only by image processing from a reliable source with excellent shadows and crisps colors, but the generated 3D images have worse resolution).