Lcd Vs. Plasma

LCD vs. Plasma

  • LCD

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Plasma

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
When I did the hard & heavy shopping between the two the Plasma won out every time. Not in every catagory but 80% of the time it outdid the comparable LCD sets. Consequently we have a 42" Samsung in the bedroom and a 50" Panasonic in the living room. The other four are old CRT's that just won't break.....tough buggers they are but soon to be obsolete.
 
crash93ssei said:
Remember that even a very expensive tv will look like crap if your input signal is low quality. You will want to get rid of as many splices and splitters as possible and go for good cables.
Click to expand...



If you are dealing with true digital broadcasts, it is pretty much a 1 or a 0, pun intended. Either the picture shows up great or it doesn't show up at all. In a very small band of signal intensity, I might get a pixelated picture but more often, I simply get nothing. If you are bringing in an analog signal, then splices and splitters can degrade the signal and show more noise and less contrast.



RG
 
I have a pioneer Plasma, 8th generation. I was concerned about burn in too but normal use including video games are not a problem. Second the LCD can still create a blur in a high movment scene, if it bothers you than plasma is the way to go, but only your eyes can tell what is best.
 
I have both plasma and lcd.

I prefer my plasma way over my lcd.

The black on my plasma is much better than my lcd.

My lcd also suffers from refresh rate and playing games on that thing is no fun.

However, my plasma suffers from glare issue if I don't have the blind drawn (just like any CRT).



I am surprised that no one has mentioned 1080p. If you intend to keep the tv for 10-15 years (by that time, you probably can upgrade to a 100 inch OLED screen for $100), make sure that you get a 1080p whatever (lcd, plasma, DLP).
 
A thought to save you a ton of dough is to think about the source of your video signal.

If the signal comes from an antenna, you'll need a tuner inside your tv.

If the signal comes from a cable company or a satellite company and you have some sort of 'box' near your tv, chances are there's a tuner inside that box.

You don't need two 'tuners' so you could buy a unit without a tuner and use the tuner inside the cable company or satellite 'box'.

I guess a tv without a tuner is just a monitor, and Maxent sells huge plasma ones for about a thousand less than a comparible tv.

I have a 52 inch Maxent and a cable HD tuner and it's a champ.

-John C.
 
'I did a ton of research before purchasing. I was in the market for a 42\". I read A LOT of reviews, and information from other TV junkies that where very well informed. \r\nWhat I gathered was that with a Plasma you get more square inches per dollar, and a very comparable, if not better picture. Plasmas has their advantages in some aspects, but so do LCD\'s in other aspects. \r\nBest thing I can tell you, is go to Best Buy, or any other store, and compare the picture between a Plasma and LCD, then decide if the extra cost of a LCD is worth it to you. Either way, you can\'t go wrong. Just dont get a cheap no name brand like Vizio. \r\n\r\nBTW, you can\'t go wrong with a Panasonic plasma.'
 
FWIW, I have seen that Sears may be offering a sweet deal on a 46" LCD for Black Friday. It looks like it is a 46" Sharp AQUOS LCD, that is currently selling for $1900 on their site. For BF, it will go for $999...looks to be a sweet deal if you want a nice set for the holidays or just because...
 
I was thinking about that, but from what I hear you'll need to camp out the night before to have any chance of scoring one of those sorts of deals.



But I'm coming to the conclusion that either one is good. Just look in the store (I think a smaller local store might be best as I've heard the big box stores aren't good for comparisons), decide which looks best for your budget and look for reviews on places like avsforum.com. Plasmas look to be cheaper and better for movies and sports, but are better in low light areas. LCD's are better for more brightly lit rooms and are preferred for gaming I think. Oh, and it sounds like plasmas consume more energy, but it's really not a lot.



The only bad thing I'm seeing is that anything not HD doesn't look very good. There really aren't many HD channels yet, and even most of the HD channels don't show HD that often. So I think I'm going to look for the best set I can find for SD programming (if that's possible).
 
Hands down plasma.



I have a Panasonic 50" 720p professional plasma.



Better viewing angle, more vibrant colors, better blacks, no motion blur. Plus they are a lot cheaper than LCDs, never had a problem with burn in.
 
FWIW, I have seen that Sears may be offering a sweet deal on a 46" LCD for Black Friday. It looks like it is a 46" Sharp AQUOS LCD, that is currently selling for $1900 on their site. For BF, it will go for $999...looks to be a sweet deal if you want a nice set for the holidays or just because...
Click to expand...

How would one be able to confirm this? I have about $1200 worth of store credit with sears, and even though I do prefer Plasma, you realy can't go wrong with a 46" Aquos for $999.
 
DLP is definitely the way to go for several reasons. The best reason is you can get a bigger set, for much less money. You can use that extra money even to go and buy a great sound system or anything else which would make your entertainment system better. Also keep in mind, with DLP technology, you don't lose picture quality the bigger you get. You don't have to worry about burn in or motion blurring either. DLPs are immune to burn in and are faster than plasma or LCD sets so even in fast scenes there is never a "blur" effect. New DLPs also use LED which means there are no bulbs to replace, no rainbow effects and pictures are brighter than ever. I bought a DLP a while ago and it was the best purchase I ever made.
 
The Sears ad scans have been posted somewhere and it shows the Sharp for $999.



Interesting about the dlp's. I had ruled them out because of having to replace bulbs for $200 or more.
 
Grimm said:
Interesting about the dlp's. I had ruled them out because of having to replace bulbs for $200 or more.
Click to expand...



I read somewhere that the new LED DLPs can last 50-100 thousand hours, which means if you keep your television on the whole time it can last 5-10 years. I definitely would take another look at them in the stores. IMO, they're way better than LCD or plasma.:up :up :up
 
I read somewhere that the new LED DLPs can last 50-100 thousand hours, which means if you keep your television on the whole time it can last 5-10 years. I definitely would take another look at them in the stores. IMO, they're way better than LCD or plasma.
Click to expand...

Although I do understand that everyone is entitled to their opinion, I dont agree with you. It sounds like you bought a DLP are trying to justify the purchase of one. I do agree that DLP's are good for the money. You get alot of square inches per dollar.. but the picture quality is NO WHERE close to a Plasma or LCD. That is my opinion.



One of my buddys is a Sears repairman, he repairs TV units. You can't get him to shut up about how much he hates DLP. He sayes more than half the jobs he gets sent out to do, are to change the bulbs in a DLP unit. He sayes he never will own a DLP. He has a LCD unit himself.
 
After looking I don't think I would buy the LED DLP. Sounds like there are still some issues with them, plus they are out of my price range. I think they are probably a good value if you are looking for a very large TV, but for a 42" like I'm looking for, I think a plasma or LCD is the way to go. I'm pretty sure a good holiday sale for a name brand under a grand will be driving my purchase.
 
Jimmy P said:
Although I do understand that everyone is entitled to their opinion, I dont agree with you. It sounds like you bought a DLP are trying to justify the purchase of one. I do agree that DLP's are good for the money. You get alot of square inches per dollar.. but the picture quality is NO WHERE close to a Plasma or LCD. That is my opinion.



One of my buddys is a Sears repairman, he repairs TV units. You can't get him to shut up about how much he hates DLP. He sayes more than half the jobs he gets sent out to do, are to change the bulbs in a DLP unit. He sayes he never will own a DLP. He has a LCD unit himself.
Click to expand...



I have no need to justify my purchase, but before buying my set I did a lot of research and found I favored DLP over others. Like everything else in this argument picture quality is a matter of opinion. I've seen many sets and still favor the picture quality on my DLP over plasma and LCD. In the end, it all comes down to the opinion of the person buying the television and which they prefer.



Again, the main complaint for DLP seems to be the bulb, which as I explained, isn't an issue with the newer LED televisions.



The point I'm trying to make is that after much debate, I opted for a DLP because it was the technology I preferred, and anyone looking to get a new television should consider it. :2thumbs:
 
My setup:



1280 x 720p LCD projector with a huge frigging bulb casting a



-=X\/ 17.5 FOOT DIAGONAL \/X=-



picture on our screen-painted living room wall.



Since our living room isn't even 37 feet deep, I think we might be sitting too close to the screen.



This LCD projector replaces an earlier DLP projector we had, and the image quality increased. LCD has become better in recent years, and like any technology DLP CAN be poorly implemented so always give highest consideration to how it actually looks to you. Look at DVDs, TV, dark scenes and bright.



One thing that I believe helps LCD in my case is that with front projectors, the LCD panel is a tiny mirror and very, very hot from the bulb. The response time with LCD is faster at high temperatures. We don't get trails.



We've had this projector for more than 2 years now on the original bulb. Yeah, when it goes it will cost a few hundred. We're cool with that.



We're bachelors so there's noone to complain about the blackout shutters on the windows or the curtain across the kitchen entryway.



We have a Wii-type remote for controlling the mouse on the PC, it's easy and natural.





For movies, living room computer use and games, a 15-foot wide screen is frigging unbelievable. We play a nuclear war sim called Defcon which, with my buddy pacing back and forth in front of The Big Board anxiously barking orders while bathed in the blue, red, and green light of ICBM tracks across a cold green vectorized map, looks and feels like a scene straight out of War Games or Dr Strangelove.



We also have a head-tracking unit for flight sims and racing that lets you look all around by turning your head slightly. Immersion = awesome.



I love technology. My only issue with this setup is that digital cable and satellite absolutely sucks. Sure we get more channels and a handy guide, but the overcompression on the video makes your multithousand dollar TV look like junk. Seriously, it was better in the old days. I imagine this will get better as bandwidth increases.. nothing will help the quality of the content of the crappy stupid shows and media though. :( I generally watch movies and play games only - I watch TV only when I'm visiting people who do.



Broadcast HDTV is excellent.
 
Interesting to see of how many that voted, how many own both, I own a 50" plasma and 42" LCD, and the difference on my plasma versus my lcd (both same brand, less than a year apart) is a lot, I was surprised to see how much in fact. Plasma for me...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top