Plasma vs. LCD????

[Phase700b]

^ ^ ^ True to some extent, but I would not buy a 720P TV in the screen size I mentioned. For a TV under 32" or under, 720P would be acceptable because the physical pixel size is pretty small. And many people, including me, CAN see the difference in 720p vs. 1080p at 15' or even 20'. Edges of objects on the screen have a softer appearance and may even show a "stepped" edge due to the larger 720p pixels.

 

[Duane]

^ ^ ^ True to some extent, but I would not buy a 720P TV in the screen size I mentioned. For a TV under 32" or under, 720P would be acceptable because the physical pixel size is pretty small. And many people, including me, CAN see the difference in 720p vs. 1080p at 15' or even 20'. Edges of objects on the screen have a softer appearance and may even show a "stepped" edge due to the larger 720p pixels.

I'm not sure I understand where you are coming from.What does scan rate have to do with pixel size? If you can point to a definitive description that 480i,480p,etc. relates to the size of picture elements, I'd surely like to read it.Just never heard it explained this way.

 

[ng0k]

My new Panasonic 42" plasma has an anti-reflective screen. Great for sports. But remember that plasma TV's xmit noise that is easily picked up on the AM radio, and HF/shortwave if that matters. I'm a ham op and my antenna is away from the house so it's ok, but my AM radios hate that TV.

 

[MichaelJ]

My 2 cents.
I bought a Sony 40” 1080 LCD about 5 years back. HD TV’s were pretty costly back then. I think I paid over 2k for it. It sits in a bright 4 Seasons room and the less reflective screen helps. A few months back I bought a Panasonic 46” 720 Plasma for less than $500. It’s far from state of the art but it has all the features I need (including streaming) and the price was right. This set is in our much darker living room. The screen is very reflective and our floor lamps can cause a problem. However, the blacks are deeper than on the LCD set and I can’t see enough of a difference between the 720 and 1080 to justify the price jump. I have my Plasma mounted on a tilting/swivel arm and I can eliminate most of the reflections with it. In a darkened room, the set really comes alive.

 

[Rilands]

My son's 50" Samsung plasma which he bought last month is set up in a very bright room in his apartment. While it is a very nice tv, the glare is pretty bad and he needs to close to drapes during the day to enjoy his new tv. From the information i've read, LCD/LED do better with the glare.
Not to many plasmas out there in the stores anymore. LCD/LED are more readily available. There must be a reason for this.

 

[Rilands]

Botritis,
My statements are a fact. If you wanted to share information you should have noted it in your prior post, instead of telling the original poster to do a search.

 

[Tom Brennan]

I'd buy a plasma given I wanted a TV in a size plasma is available in. Deeper blacks and less uniformity issues. "LED" is often a con and only LEDs that are locally dimming and placed behind the screen have an advantage over fluorescently backlit LCDs; indeed edge mounted LEDs are reported as often having far worse uniformity than fluorescent backlights.

Bad uniformity shows as cloudiness and light areas on a black screen and is quite common with LCD TVs, both of my Samsung LCD TVs suffer from it to some extent. I bought the one Samsung, an 850 in the front room, because the styling was so very pleasing to my wife and in the interest of domestic harmony I was willing to compromise a little picture quality. The other I bought LCD because in the size I need plasma TVs are not available. So that's that.

 

[WhiteSE]

My plasma is just now dying after 8+ years..a Dell...but because of the weight of the Plasmas, I wouldnt do Plasma again...royal PITA!

 

[Phase700b]

I'm not sure I understand where you are coming from.What does scan rate have to do with pixel size? If you can point to a definitive description that 480i,480p,etc. relates to the size of picture elements, I'd surely like to read it.Just never heard it explained this way.

Hmmm. . . well that is interesting. Can't understand why anyone would never have "heard it this way".

Most /TV makers refer to the native screen resolution as either 720p or 1080p which also relates to either 1280 x 720 pixels or 1920 x 1080 pixels. Here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/720p

And here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p


This is how the industry uses the terms. It is very common, and therefore also relates to physical pixel size depending on screen size. Since any 720p or 1080p TV has the same number of physical pixels for it's resolution (native resolution), the larger the screen the bigger the pixels have to be and therefore are able to be seen as the screen size is made larger. Take a look at any low priced 50" 720p plasma TV and you can easily see the physical pixels. I can see them even on 1080p plasma and LCD TVs over 50" in size. It starts to look as though you are looking at the picture through a "screen door".

 

[whoaru99]

Not to many plasmas out there in the stores anymore. LCD/LED are more readily available. There must be a reason for this.

Yeah, I'm sure there is. IMO, it's probably more related to profit margin than superior performance.

 

[Cosmic]

Panasonic Viera 58-inch 700-series Plasma here.

I am a "Film buff" not a "TV buff" so that is why I bought it, and it has given me every cent of worth of the $3000 it cost me 2.5 years ago.
I speak as someone who has worked in broadcast TV for more than 25 years.

I don't care about 3-D, I just want deep blacks, no motion issues, and very clean 1080 for my Blu-Rays, with a color scheme that can be tweaked to film.

If they are indeed bringing back plasma production, depending on your needs, they are amazing looking displays.

If you have a bright room, put up some blackout curtains, ferkrisssake, they don't have to be heavy to shield the light

I have yet to see any other TV technology beat a plasma.

C.

 

[Vintage_Hi-F]

Yeah, I'm sure there is. IMO, it's probably more related to profit margin than superior performance.

Actually LED is more expensive to make than plasma. You can get a good 55" panny plasma for around a 1G (less if you're persistent) a good 50" LED will run you between 1,600-2,000 (not one sale). LED is becoming more prevalent because it's bridged the gap that plasma had over the older CFL back lit LCD's, also they use significantly less power to run and they run cooler (people like having a lower electric bill). Also Sharp and Samsung make LED LCD's that can preform just as well if not better than a comparable plasma. Honestly this sounds similar to the comments I heard when I worked at Best Buy in high school about CRT rear projection being phased out for DLP and plasma.

 

[stonedeaf]

Pioneer Elite

Ok -to show how out of it and just plain warped I am - we still watch a last generation LG CRT HDTV. One result of this is that I notice all sorts of artifacts on flat screens . If it's big -I've had a strong preference for plasmas -and having said that - the LCD obvious generational improvements have seemed to run about 6 months to a year - they just keep gettin better! AND about two weeks ago I saw the new Pioneer Elite LCD and have to admit - it's at least as fine a pic as I've ever seen from a plasma. Apparently Sharp based with video processing from Pioneer ? REALLY nice picture!

 

[whoaru99]

I'm kinda missing the point of a comparison between a killer deal on a plasma vs. normal retail on a LED.

Are you implying a TV mfg is probably making less money selling a LED TV than a plasma TV? You could be 100% correct, if that's what you're saying, but I don't buy it.

 

[Vintage_Hi-F]

I'm kinda missing the point of a comparison between a killer deal on a plasma vs. normal retail on a LED.

No I'm comparing normal retail to normal retail. Best buy is selling a 55" Panasonic 3D plasma for 1,100 retail. My Sharp Aquos Quattron non 3D costs 1,600 retail.

Are you implying a TV mfg is probably making less money selling a LED TV than a plasma TV? You could be 100% correct, if that's what you're saying, but I don't buy it.

How is that hard to buy? I mean DLP cost more that a comparable rear projection CRT when it was launched. Plasma is 10 year old tech why wouldn't it be cheaper.

 

[Vintage_Hi-F]

Ok -to show how out of it and just plain warped I am - we still watch a last generation LG CRT HDTV. One result of this is that I notice all sorts of artifacts on flat screens . If it's big -I've had a strong preference for plasmas -and having said that - the LCD obvious generational improvements have seemed to run about 6 months to a year - they just keep gettin better! AND about two weeks ago I saw the new Pioneer Elite LCD and have to admit - it's at least as fine a pic as I've ever seen from a plasma. Apparently Sharp based with video processing from Pioneer ? REALLY nice picture!

Did it just say Elite, cause that would be sharp using the name they licensed from Pioneer.

 

[whoaru99]

I'm talking margin, not selling price.

I have a hard time believing that mfgs would push a technology that nets them less money. Again, I could be wrong, I don't claim to be a financial genius, but working for a large company it seems bottom line is the driving force. Follow the money, so to speak.

 

[Vintage_Hi-F]

I'm talking margin, not selling price.

I have a hard time believing that mfgs would push a technology that nets them less money. Again, I could be wrong, I don't claim to be a financial genius, but working for a large company it seems bottom line is the driving force. Follow the money, so to speak.

True, but selling price can shed a bit of light on margins to.Why would Panasonic charge more for a 47" VIERA LED LCD that there 55" Plasma if that plasma cost more to make. You have to admit that makes little sense from a business stand point as well. Also all companies making LED LCD make regular CFL LCD still which is unbelievably cheap 55" TV selling for under a grand on a regular basis. Those are the major money makers and thats what the general public is still buying. Well that and the bargain bin LED's from RCA, Viore, Vizio, and Westinghouse.LED back lighting can be cheap but only when you cut serious corners.

 

[whoaru99]

It does stand to reason that if it cost more to make it should sell for higher price. And, since it might be promoted as new and or superior technology, it could be priced at a premium. Hence, larger profit margin even though it cost more to make.

Again, it's speculation on my part but I keep coming back to the bottom line since that's typically what business decisions are all about.

I've got the itch for a newer TV even though mine's roughly only 5 years old and working flawlessly with roughly 5,000 hours of use now. I'll give the LEDs a shot when it comes time to buy but they'll have to be really, really good to overcome my predisposition to plasma PQ.

 

[Vintage_Hi-F]

It does stand to reason that if it cost more to make it should sell for higher price. And, since it might be promoted as new and or superior technology, it could be priced at a premium. Hence, larger profit margin even though it cost more to make.

Again, it's speculation on my part but I keep coming back to the bottom line since that's typically what business decisions are all about.

I've got the itch for a newer TV even though mine's roughly only 5 years old and working flawlessly with roughly 5,000 hours of use now. I'll give the LEDs a shot when it comes time to buy but they'll have to be really, really good to overcome my predisposition to plasma PQ.

Look at Sharp and Samsung's Top Tier, they honestly look just as good as the comparable Panasonic Plasma. Don't get me wrong Plasma delivers an amazing picture but you can't compare bottom of the line CFL or LED LCD to top tier CLF or LED and Plasma.