Sigma had to make "new" models just so they could sell them cheaper. Their most interesting models IMO are their large-sensor compacts - they may be limited to a signal focal length (no zoom, for the lay people) and their processing may also be comparatively slow, but the massive amount of detail they extract (at small-ish file sizes) is impressive, and a real boon for landscape, fashion, and the crazy prime lens street shooters. Probably product photographers too. The other "interesting" sensor maker is Fuji. They've thought of about 5 different ways to boost the dynamic range and decrease noise, just by themselves. I think it's interesting that Bayer was a scientist working for Kodak, and their own invention put them out of business – mostly because their board members were scared of change, and were still having meetings in even 2008 about "How are we going to kill off this 'digital' fad?"
I could talk your ear off about sensor-size equivalency and functional camera design, but that would be waaaay OT. I'll just say I love Olympus' engineers and hate their management, and we'll leave the camera talk to DPR
As far as "green light" as a channel of light and a video signal, we are instinctively "attracted" to it and our eyes are sensitive to it, but green also carries more - I forget the word right now, but basically luminance and energy. Think red laser pointers vs green.
I wonder if ghosting wouldn't be less of a problem on a Plasma than LCD, and typical computer monitors because of the sluggish response time (high may not be the most intuitive adjective, though technically correct) of typical LCDs?
Is it obvious that I'm trying to think of anything but the Annies while the excitement is fresh?