Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Plasma Or LCD Screen, Which Is Best?  
User currently offlineKLMCedric From Belgium, joined Dec 2003, 810 posts, RR: 22
Posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2219 times:

My TV is broke, so I'm looking to buy a flatscreen.
I'm hesitating between LCD or plasma as I heard good and bad things about
both.
I've been told that LCD screens typically go bust after three years, or at
least the image quality significantly goes down.??
I've been told that plasma screens consume a lot more electricity then
conventional TV's and LCD screens??
Anyone care to share his knowledge/opinion with me about this??

21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20374 posts, RR: 62
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2209 times:

I'll be interested in the responses to this thread, since I'm looking to replace a TV too, but probably not as quickly.

The big advantage to LCDs I've seen is no screen burn in that's a problem with projection and plasma TVs. All these channel identifiers and news scrolls that are a near permanent part of the TV image these days can wreck havoc with the screen.

I've heard there's a new kind of TV, a DLP(?) that also doesn't have the screen burn problem.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2209 times:

LCD. Go into an electrical store which has the two side by side and you'll see the difference immediately.

User currently offlineKLMCedric From Belgium, joined Dec 2003, 810 posts, RR: 22
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2202 times:

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 2):
LCD. Go into an electrical store which has the two side by side and you'll see the difference immediately.

I agree the image looks better on an LCD, but I don't want to have to buy
a new one every three years, I've had my last TV for 11years.


User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20374 posts, RR: 62
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2200 times:

Quoting KLMCedric (Reply 3):
I don't want to have to buy
a new one every three years

I don't think LCDs break that quickly. From what I've read, there's a backlight element that can be easily replaced vs. a lot more complicated circuitry and screen hardware if a plasma goes down, and an LCD holds its brilliance longer.

A friend has a 2 year old Sharp Aquos 37" that I watched while staying at their home last month, and the only problem I saw with it was occasional bits of pixelization during fast moving images that I don't see on my projection TV.

The other thing to consider is how far from the screen you'll be sitting. Some TVs are just better for a larger room (like a projection set), and others for smaller or close-in viewing.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11446 posts, RR: 76
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2195 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think that both are rather good, but if you have the room go to Circuit City or Best Buy and look at the projection HDTVs. I saw a 65 inch HDTV projection screen television for about a $1000 on sale and the picture quality is fantastic. I don't see $3000 difference in the picture quality. The projection screen television will last a good 10 years and you'll be happy.

If you insist on getting the flat screens then look hard at plasma, which all the wonks say has better picture quality but costs a bit more.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineMEA310 From Lebanon, joined Feb 2002, 660 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2190 times:

Sony offers a head-to-head comparison between LCD & Plasma, here's the link from the Middle East website:

http://www.sony-mea.com/bravia/html/plasma.html

Hope this helps,


MEA310



M5 Fastest Sedan On Earth
User currently offlineMalmoaviation From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 385 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2152 times:

LCD is much better than plasma. You might not get that 42inch screen, but you will have a TV for maybe 20years instead of around 5years. Plasma has the big problem that the picture will burn in, and that is annoying. I recommend a 32inch LCD TV, and I will buy something like that in some months.

Have a nice day Big grin


User currently offlineSCCutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5488 posts, RR: 28
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2150 times:

DLP beats 'em both, but is not as flat.


...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineIRelayer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1073 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2142 times:

Quoting KLMCedric (Thread starter):
I've been told that LCD screens typically go bust after three years, or at
least the image quality significantly goes down.??
I've been told that plasma screens consume a lot more electricity then
conventional TV's and LCD screens??
Anyone care to share his knowledge/opinion with me about this??

No, no, no, and no. All of the things you listed are common myths.

First thing to remember when buying consumer electronics (TV's, MP3 players, computers, anything). DO NOT LISTEN to the majority of customers. They are almost completely misinformed most of the time by advertisements, TV shows, other customers, and idiot salespeople at most places that have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

Look at it this way (very simplified):

Plasma: Cheaper for large sizes (42"+), better picture quality, better "togetherness" of the picture, better contrast ratio...just a better picture overall.

Plasma's do tend to run really hot, and they are prone to screen "burn-in" (as with CRT projection TV's). Other than that a good HD plasma set is a very good TV and will last you upwards of 10 years with regular usage and good care. Do not purchase extended warranties on these sets, they are very overpriced and not worth it.


LCD's: a brighter, "crisper" picture. Some people prefer this type of picture, but to me it doesn't look natural and the brightness washes out some color in the picture. No burn in, runs pretty cool. Contrast ratio is getting better and better with each generation. Still very expensive for large sizes (37"+) but very reasonable for smaller than that.

My rec for over 42" would be a plasma hands down (a good one). Under that would be an LCD, preferably Sharp (I don't know what the brands are like in Belgium).

Here is a good US forum discussing these things:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb


Good luck

-IR


User currently offlineWingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2211 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2137 times:

I'm in the market myself and am looking at everything from 42-56 inches. I've done a lot of research and the market is very complex. The choices and number of model designations make it tough to understand all of the differences. Try going to CNET.com. They have comprehensive technical reviews and editor ratings to help you decide. Based on my own research I am leaning pretty heavily towards the Samsung 1080i DLP models. They and Sony currently get among the highst ratings across the board. If you have the money Panasonic is a clear Plasma leader and their newer models offer a shifting technology that prevents burn in. Expect to pay $1000 more than a similarly sized DLP model that many technical specialists say has little real difference. CNET is also a very useful place to shop for price. I have seen price differences of up to $1500 for the same exact TV depending on the vendor. Let us know what you decide, no mater what it is you're bound to be very pleased.

User currently offlineFlyVirgin744 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 1313 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2126 times:

It appears most of you are blind. I've bought two plasmas over the past 4 years. Both run flawlessly and I think LCD looks like shit. LCDs are SLOW, and pitiful refresh rates. And with plasmas, even though I recognize the threat is there, I've never had a problem with burn in.

However, this thread is about YOU

When you go into an electronics store, all the LCDs and plasmas will be showing high definition. So they will all look good. Ask to see them side by side with standard definition. Then the difference will be extremely clear. LCD looks like crap with a lower resolution image. The plasma will appear much better and remember, 90% of what you watch will be standard definition.

My two plasmas are sony and panasonic. I'd recommend Panasonic, Pioneer second. I think Samsung looks the worst. Panasonic and Pioneer have great contrast, black levels, and brightness (try getting black levels on an LCD).

Good luck!



Sometimes I go about in pity for myself and all the while a great wind carries me across the sky.
User currently offlineIRelayer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1073 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2103 times:

Quoting Wingman (Reply 10):
The choices and number of model designations make it tough to understand all of the differences. Try going to CNET.com. They have comprehensive technical reviews and editor ratings to help you decide

I would not recommend looking at CNET. Their information is incomplete and they rely too heavily on the specifications of the TV in ranking them.

Again, AVS Forum is THE best place to ask for this sort of advice. People on there are all HT junkies and you will usually get good advice and will really be able to glean which TV is the best for your needs.

Again:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb

Quoting Wingman (Reply 10):
Expect to pay $1000 more than a similarly sized DLP model that many technical specialists say has little real difference.

The "difference" is that one is a flat panel and one is not. Also, DLP's are projection units and so viewing angle becomes an issue. Plasma's are direct view TV's and so you can see them great at almost any angle, whereas DLP's drop off once you get to the sides of it. Also DLP's have what is called the "rainbow effect" which not a lot of people see but it is there and it is a concern. It is all personal preference. I agree that DLP's are definately the best value right now (I myself have a DLP front projector), but some people need the things that Plasma offers.

-IR

[Edited 2005-12-18 00:16:49]

User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31667 posts, RR: 56
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2069 times:

Plasma def.Although in smaller sizes only LCD is available.
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21406 posts, RR: 54
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2021 times:

Quoting FlyVirgin744 (Reply 11):
When you go into an electronics store, all the LCDs and plasmas will be showing high definition. So they will all look good. Ask to see them side by side with standard definition. Then the difference will be extremely clear. LCD looks like crap with a lower resolution image. The plasma will appear much better and remember, 90% of what you watch will be standard definition.

Standard to hi-def scaling depends completely on the image processing unit built into the device; It is independent of the pixel display.

From all the tests I've seen so far my impression is that the manufacturers are still conducting expensive tests with the early adopters right now - all high-resolution displays today are apparently more or less severely flawed; By far the best strategy would be to sit back, let others pay for the development and join in when the growing pains have been financed by the others who couldn't wait and thus end up with instantly outdated early models...


User currently offlineSimo82 From Italy, joined Feb 2005, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1995 times:

I work in a store selling TV's and I can tell you that plasma overall is much much better than LCD, what was previously said by IRelayer and FlyVirgin744 is 100% correct.

When choosing a TV first of all you must decided the size of it, that should be proportioned with the distances from where you watch it. Then you should think of what kind of source you use ( SAT, DVD's, normal PAL ) and buy what is optimized for you. Sometimes TV's that look better in shops, once you but them at home with a different source are the worst.

Said this I would suggest if you want a 32" lcd's : Phillips' 32PF9830 which is really the best but only if connected to digital sources, if you watch PAL TV it is even worst than others. For PAL TV I'd go for Sharp Optimal Aquos 32P50e.

For plasmas buy Panasonic which is really the best choice compared with the cost.

Ciao
Simo


User currently offlineFlyVirgin744 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 1313 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1968 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 14):
Standard to hi-def scaling depends completely on the image processing unit built into the device; It is independent of the pixel display.

Klaus,

nevermind the electronics, just use your eyes, LCD clearly does not look the same as plasma when displaying a lower res image.

If you use the same juicer for an apple and an orange, you still get apple juice and orange juice, same goes for plasma and LCD.



Sometimes I go about in pity for myself and all the while a great wind carries me across the sky.
User currently offlineSudden From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 4130 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1964 times:

Just my point of view,

question as what will you use it for, comes to mind.
I mean, are you a high end user that have a decent home cinema with a very good DVD along with it, or will you "just" watch TV?

These are issues I always ask myself when buying these sort of stuff.
I will not recommend you either of them, as you should build your opinion after visiting several resellers and get a feel for it.
In the end you will make the right choice.

I have plasma for the fact that I have a DTS system, and do not want to watch a good movie with a small screen.
But this does not mean that I find plasma better then LCD. I am happy with what I have, and that's what counts.  Smile

Aim for the sky!
Sudden



When in doubt, flat out!
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21406 posts, RR: 54
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1909 times:

Quoting FlyVirgin744 (Reply 16):
nevermind the electronics, just use your eyes, LCD clearly does not look the same as plasma when displaying a lower res image.

That would only mean anything if both used the same scaler, which they almost certainly do not.


User currently offlineChrista From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1894 times:

We have a 32" LG LCD TV..It's fantastic!

Regards,
Chris


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1873 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 1):
I'll be interested in the responses to this thread, since I'm looking to replace a TV too, but probably not as quickly.

The big advantage to LCDs I've seen is no screen burn in that's a problem with projection and plasma TVs. All these channel identifiers and news scrolls that are a near permanent part of the TV image these days can wreck havoc with the screen.

I've heard there's a new kind of TV, a DLP(?) that also doesn't have the screen burn problem.

I'll be replacing a TV after Christmas, and it will probably be a 32" LCD. No plasma, because of the screen burn problem. DLP is nice, as long as you are sitting right in front of the screen. Move to the side of the room, and screen dims.


User currently offlineMelpax From Australia, joined Apr 2005, 1589 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1832 times:

Just today I've bought a 42 inch HD plasma, just a tad under 2K. It's a Chinese brand one, but the picture quality is as good as some of the 'brand' ones costing almost twice as much. Gotta say it's worth it, much better than the old LCD one!!


Essendon - Whatever it takes......
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Plasma Or LCD? Which Way To Go? posted Tue Apr 11 2006 07:03:27 by Luisde8cd
Which Is Best: Atlanta, Miami Or Washington DC? posted Tue Aug 31 2004 07:47:55 by Jasepl
Month/Day Or Day/Month, Which Is More Used? posted Wed Apr 20 2005 12:31:36 by Braybuddy
Which Is Best Hotel To View SXM Arrivals? posted Sun Oct 10 2004 16:42:57 by Capital146
Cell Phone Providers, Which Is Best? posted Wed Jul 14 2004 04:38:00 by N685FE
Which Is Better "Tommy Boy" Or "Black Sheep"? posted Sat Sep 30 2006 08:23:55 by RJwrench85
What Should I Buy - Pioneer Plasma Or Sony LCD? posted Sun Nov 20 2005 18:51:24 by Comorin
Edtv Plasma Or Hdtv DLP/LCD Projection? posted Tue Sep 27 2005 20:17:25 by MGA
Thriller Or Eagles Greatest Hits...Which Is # 1? posted Fri Apr 30 2004 05:55:55 by NBC News1
Who Is Best Disney Florida Or Disney Paris. posted Mon Apr 26 2004 16:56:27 by SASlover