Panasonic Viera TX-P50X10 50in Plasma TV - Panasonic Viera TX-P50X10

John Archer

By John Archer



  • Recommended by TR
Panasonic Viera TX-P50X10 50in Plasma TV


Our Score:


The last point I want to make in favour of the P50X10's pictures is to reinforce something I obliquely hinted at earlier; namely that the colour issues that cause trouble with standard definition pictures really are drastically reduced when watching HD. They don't completely go; there still occasionally seems a vaguely orange pall over certain scenes. But the situation is so much improved that once you've also added into the equation the exceptional black level response, crisp motion and good detailing, HD pictures are frequently capable of looking ridiculously good for a 50in TV which costs, lest you haven't noticed, only around £800.

Dragging myself away from those lovable HD images to focus on the P50X10's audio, the news is again pretty good. The soundstage is cast unusually wide for such an affordable TV, and there's also just about enough breathing space in the set's dynamic range to accommodate an action sequence without sounding too flat or muddy.

Just occasionally male voices can sound a little thick and soupy, and of course we'd always recommend that you use a separate audio system with a screen as large as this. But for the most part I really don't think you've got much to complain about given how cheap the TV is.


The colour issues noted with the P50X10's standard definition pictures stop me being able to give the P50X10 any higher than eight for picture quality, as was the case with the P37X10. But the P50X10's marginally superior HD efforts and, in particular, its amazing value give me enough ammunition to nudge the set's overall mark up to a thoroughly deserved nine.

Mikey uk

March 26, 2009, 4:07 pm

I guess here we see Pioneer's problem. A 50" plasma for 𧿘 with a good picture and specs. Not a 'great' picture that you get with a Pioneer of the same size and similar spec, but quite good enough for the mass market, and hundreds of pounds cheaper. It seems not enough of us are willing to pay the extra to get Pioneer's level of quality (I am one) - a shame.


March 26, 2009, 4:54 pm

No 1080p on a 50" screen? No interest.


March 26, 2009, 5:37 pm

An overall 9 for a 50" screen with 1366 x 768 resolution. Gimme a break.

The reason you seem to get flooded with Panasonic kit is because of reviews like this. You keep puffing up mediocre kit like this they'll keep sending.


March 26, 2009, 6:02 pm

Newsflash people: resolution is NOT the be-all, end-all of image quality. Especially not with plasma displays.


March 26, 2009, 6:11 pm

@Hugo - agreed. The 42in first generation Pioneer Kuros were all 720p and there's still not a TV out there to touch them, 1080p or otherwise, apart from the Kuro second generation!

Andy Vandervell

March 26, 2009, 6:24 pm

I'd add, too, that the award is largely for value - as is highlighted in the verdict. Not saying people haven't, but scores are closely tied to the review, so looking at the scores without reading the review doesn't give you the whole picture.

Also, we're looking into adding a Value award in future...not a promise mind, but we have talked about it. If people feel strongly that this would be a good or bad thing, do let us know.

solus 1

March 26, 2009, 7:28 pm

What's the big difference between 1080 and 720? Is it really noticeable? And yeah, personally think the value award would be a great idea.


March 26, 2009, 9:17 pm

@Hugo - Well why does anybody bother making 1080p sets then?

And how come nobody ever mentions how much juice these babies guzzle?


March 27, 2009, 12:03 am

@basicasic - Hugo didn’t say that 1080p isn’t important, just that it’s not the only factor. As I always say, I consider black level response to be the most important factor in TV picture quality. This is why, as Gordon pointed out, the non 1080p first generation Pioneer Kuro sets still wiped the floor with everything else out there.

That said, the larger the screen, the more important a Full HD resolution is and I’m not sure that I would buy a 50in TV that wasn’t 1,920 x 1,080. But many people aren’t as critical as I am, and most of them wouldn’t pony up for a 50in 1080p Kuro like I did. What can’t be ignored is that this TV offers amazing value for money, and for a lot of consumers a 50in Panasonic plasma for under 𧿘 is a dream come true.


March 27, 2009, 4:44 am

More unattractive Panasonics, guess design isn't that important. Shame...


March 27, 2009, 5:48 am


Yes your right. If 1080p is so important to someone then they would not be buying what is ostensibly a "value" set.


"why does anybody bother making 1080p sets then?" To be slightly cynical - marketing and the need for continued consumer aspiration. - The old ploy of providing what the consumer whats. But they (the consumer)can only want what we (the manufacturer) decide offer.

Otherwise, we would all be watching analogue B&W 425line(?)TV.


March 27, 2009, 4:27 pm

I have a 50" Panny that is 1080p, but most of the HD content I watch is not 1080p and to be honest I don't really notice the difference. Sure, if you fire up 1080p and get closer and study the picture you can see the differences, but is nothing like as great as going from 480p to 720p. I got a 1080p because I thought I wanted it (don't believe the hype and all that!!). If you want 1080p, then go for it, but if you want to start enjoying HD content on a large TV, on a budget, then I would not hesitate in recommending a lower resolution one.


March 30, 2009, 1:43 pm

Can you do comparative review of which flat screen TV makes a good alternative to Computer screens? Or include this as one of the features you check in your normal reviews. Ta.

comments powered by Disqus