Plasma TV ? - Page 2

Polygon · 05-02-08, 07:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by bumoftheday

That article reads like a player in the high end plasma market couldn't stop losing money because they won't put out lower end tv's stopped making plasma. The 4 largest manufacturers still make plasmas. It is on it's way out eventually, especially with OLED's and other upcoming tech, but it is far from dead as the article proclaims.

I fail to see the difference in buying a dead technology or a technology that is going to die. That article is simply the beginning of the end.

Dirty-Sanchez · 05-02-08, 07:57

If you can find a 1080p plasma (Panasonic), that has the 'anti-glare film' for under $1000, BUY IT!

Great deal, and you will save a ton of $$ over anything close to it-period.

KnuckleBuckett · 05-03-08, 04:58

Plasma has always had several serious issues. Screen door effect, durability, burn-in, contrast issues, spurious artifacts.

OLED is coming along nicely.

The answer is likely going to be laser. They are due to be on the market in August. Lasers are the first format ever produced that can deliver 100% of the color intensity that the human eye can see. Even the best of the other technologies can only push in the 40% range.

My advice is Laser TV.

Check it out in Google and or YouTube.

bumoftheday · 05-03-08, 06:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polygon

I fail to see the difference in buying a dead technology or a technology that is going to die. That article is simply the beginning of the end.

Then why buy any technology? Virtually everything in the world of technology will die.

I was more commenting on the spin behind the article. When I see Panasonic bow out of the Plasma market, I will concede that it is pretty much dead.

Polygon · 05-03-08, 07:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by bumoftheday

Then why buy any technology? Virtually everything in the world of technology will die.

I was more commenting on the spin behind the article. When I see Panasonic bow out of the Plasma market, I will concede that it is pretty much dead.

Come on, you're just being silly. You know what I mean. It's sort of like buying into HD DVD. There is little point in investing money into a technology that is obsolete or will be shortly.

Black240SX · 05-03-08, 08:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polygon

There is little point in investing money into a technology that is obsolete or will be shortly.

Buying a tv is not investing in a technology. It's just a tv. It'll work the same even if no one manufactures them anymore.

My tv has a cathode ray tube, and is thus entirely obsolete. It still works just the same as it ever did.

KnuckleBuckett · 05-04-08, 02:25

Sigh. He is just tring to give solid valuable advice.

Why the opposition? Plasma has issues and it may well not be around soon. Who wants a TV technology that may not be supported in the near future. Pioneer figured this out, and ceased production of plasma. Lots of technologies are looking good LED, OLED, and Laser among them.

bumoftheday · 05-04-08, 08:07

Who cares if a TV is not supported. Even now, it is way too expensive to fix anything in any of these TV's.

If HD-DVD is not supported in the future, they put out no movies, so your player is worthless. If they stop supporting the TV, you still have a TV with the same inputs as any other TV you would have got.

The opposition is because I disagree with his advice and I am trying to cut down on the hype.

Main issues with plasma: Burn in is essentially a thing of the past. If you are worried, put on a dynamic signal when you take a leak, it takes a lot longer to burn anything in than you can hold it for. If you are stupid, you can still have burn in.

Lifespan: old plasmas would only last a couple years, but the current generation of Panasonic (and several others) is 60000 hours, or about 20 years at 8 hours a day.

Glare: The anti-glare coating makes this better, but it is still not as good as LCD, but even uncoated sets have less glare than CRT's. If you have a window directly behind the TV, it may be a problem. My roommate owns a 1080p 42" sharp LCD and he has said that my 50" Panasonic plasma has a better picture, and I paid less for my 50" than he paid for his 42'.

I think that the better black levels and significantly higher contrast are worth the trade off. The picture is better, I've even had LCD lovers tell me that.

Let me end by saying I do not think Plasma is the be all end all. I think that if you have a 1080p source, it is easier to find a good 1080p LCD at the right price than a 1080p plasma. If you have no 1080p sources and don't plan on doing anything but watching TV, do not waste your money on 1080p.

KnuckleBuckett · 05-04-08, 11:40

If you decide to get anything less than a 1080P you are making a mistake.

bumoftheday · 05-04-08, 12:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by KnuckleBuckett

If you decide to get anything less than a 1080P you are making a mistake.

Please explain why. If you have a 1080p source, it could be beneficial. If you plan on doing nothing but watching TV where 720p or 1080i is the broadcast format, and will be for a long time, you are wasting $ getting a 1080p.

Also, take a look at the graph below. It says that if you sit >8' from a 42" or >10' from a 50", that you get no benefit from 1080p. The human eye can't tell the difference.

If you have a valid reason other than marketing hype, please step in.

KnuckleBuckett · 05-04-08, 03:23

First. I am not into marketing hype. That was kind of rude. I am here to lend advice not spam marketing filth.

Now.

1080P is a common format and becoming increasingly more common. It looks great and markets well. ("We have 1080P. They have 720P. Who you gonna watch?")

Whenever a signal is converted from the original format, visual artifacts are created due to imperfect algorythms and signal processing through the Digital signal to Digital down/up conversion to Analog processing path. These artifacts are magnified and increase in number of occurances as the ratio of the format increases. Further these artifacts are clearly visable at any reasonable viewing distance on any type of television. As the popularity of 1080P grows, the amount of material natively filmed in 1080P increases with it, well into the forseable future. Also the 1080P converter electronics and algorythms are inherently capable of faster, cleaner, and more accurate processing than the others (thus the increased cost). To avoid blurs, pixilizations, crawling lines, overcontrasts, line to line misalignments, etc it is wise to purchase a tv with native interpolation in a format that will best benefit the optical quality for your television set over the forseeable future. In the case of modern day and up and coming broadcast formats 1080P in most areas is a quickly growing standard.

I hope this helped to make the issue easer to understand.

jfelbab · 05-04-08, 04:17

1080P broadcast is not happening anytime soon, if ever. So don't waste your money if you are planning on watching any broadcast or cable in 1080P. you will likely have a couple more sets before that ever happens.