Plasma vs. LCD????

[Dr Tinear]

... any anti glare coating applied to a plasma panel only serves to further reduce sometimes already dismal brightness. I really wanted to like a Panasonic G25 and some other plasma TVs. Couldn't get over these hurdles.

My Panasonic plasma is in a family room with doorwalls to the east and west and four large windows to the south. Even with the AR coating, the screen brightness in that room is more than satisfactory for daytime viewing.

Now, LCD has it's lighting uniformity issues for some models, but a little time spent in research will get you a very good TV picture.

Bottom line. For most people who don't want to pull drapes in the day time, want a bright, clear, and sharp picture, low power consumption with less heat; a good LCD TV with either CCFL or Full Array local dimming LED back light is tops. Some of the mid to higher priced Sony, LG, and Panasonic LCD/LED TVs are very good. They provide stunning picture quality for a decent price.

As long as you don't mind motion artifacts in your sports programs, that is. I'll take my plasma's 600 Hz sub-field refresh rate over the 60 or 120 Hz of the typical LCD set, thank you.

The back lighting uniformity issues for LCD/LED TVs seem to largely be due to a couple of reasons. Screen size/frame thinness and poor lighting from the "edge lit" LED models.

Edge lighting with LEDs requires considerable optical design skill in engineering the light pipes for even illumination. I expect that the edge-lit sets will get better as the manufacturers master the art of designing the light pipes.

If you think about it, a 50" or larger LCD panel needs a lot of support. Sometimes just the shipping and handling of a TV, whether plasma or LCD, before it gets to you can create an issue especially if it has a very thin frame/bezel around the LCD panel. However, the industry now seems to realize this and is stiffening up frames to help support the LCD panel. And, if a TV arrives in your home after spending time in a cold UPS truck or store warehouse, let it acclimate to room temperature for at lest several hours before plugging it in. Also, there are many CCFL ( Cold Cathode Florescent Lamp) LCD TVs that provide a very good picture. These CCFL TVs have been in use in airports running 24/7 for years. But if you want the increased contrast ratio of an LED-LCD TV, make sure you get one with "Full Array" local dimming for the LED back light. Very deep blacks are produced with such TVs rivaling a plasma.

Lastly, TVs have actually gotten so good in the past 10 years that even a casual owner will notice discrepancies that were either not present or not seen on the old 36" "tube" TV they had. And the technology is still evolving along with market driven cost/benefit trade offs. We all have the resources on the web to do a little research and and also educate ourselves to make a good purchasing decision. A great time to buy a TV!

Excellent points, and I couldn't agree more with your conclusion that now is a great time to buy a TV.

 

[89grand]

I bought neither, and instead recently purchased a Mitsubishi DLP 65". Not only are the prices excellent for them (I paid $799 from Dell, and they have a 60" for $699), I had no intention of wall mounting anyway, so the 14" or so of depth is do worse than a plasma or LCD on a stand.

I've seen some instances of rainbowing in dark scenes, but oddly, it seems to be something I notice a lot less as of late. The picture quality is fantastic, and so was the price, and very little glare because of the screen finish. They are really tough to beat unless you must wall mount your tv.

 

[Cosmic]

The part of this discussion I don't get (as mentioned earlier) is: who says you are supposed to be able to watch video images in bright daylight without making any effort to block the windows?

A home movie, a movie theatre, showing slides...all depend on darkness, and so does a good video display image.

You want max black levels and excellent contrast, it't not going to be with the porch door open and the sun in the West coming at you.

Darken the room with light but dense blackout curtains, make some effort on your part; it ain't all in the bloody set. The laws of physics still apply :thmbsp:

 

[Cobaltturbo]

A little late to this but I have been a die-hard plasma fan until recently. i have a panasonic pro series 60 inch TV which has a fantastic picture however i recently viewed an Aquos 60" Quattron 240hz tv LC60LE835U and i have to admit it is a better TV. The blacks are better and although it doesn't have the off axis viewing that than Panasonic has it is good enough and the picture is impressive.

They all use glass screens now instead of plastic on the LED's so I think you will find light will impact both equally. at $2799 list the aquos is a good buy for what it offers, uses less electricity gives off less heat and is far thinner than the plasma.

 

[stonedeaf]

agree about Aquos

I agree with cobaltturbo that the newest generation of Sharp Aquos are pretty amazing - this is the basis for the new Pioneer Elite displays. I saw the Sharp at one of my local Costsco stores - I assume the setups/signals going to the maybe 20 or so screens on display were identical. - the new generation Sharps looked so much better than the sorta blah screens next to them. What puzzled me was that several of the competitive screens looked really awful - while having viewed them at several local stores - they hadn't been all that bad ? Finally it hit me that the light level at Costco is insanely brighter than in any home I've ever been in. I would have to say that judging displays in this type of non real world environment is about as valid as listening to speakers on the aircraft hangar sized Best Buy sales floor. If the demonstration conditions are very far removed from the end use conditions - you really can't trust your own eyes ( or ears).
And I am still VERY impressed by the new Sharp Aquos displays - the amazing lack of artifacts is another aspect of this unit that has nothing to do with light levels.

 

[Phase700b]

LG 42LD520 and LG47LK520 LCD [Not LED]

I continue to be very pleased with the 42" and 47" LG LCD TVs picture quality and performance. Off angle viewing is very good, and picture quality was actually very good out of the box as long as settings were made with at least a cal disc like AVIA, AVS HD 709, or Spears Munsil. I know of no other TVs in the mid price range [$580 to $750] that offer the features, 10 point ISF calibration control, and non glare matte screen. And, note. . . these TVs use the CCFL back lighting which provides some of the most uniform picture illumination with no "blooming" or glowing edges like many LED TVS do.

And. . . when the time is taken to actually do a full picture calibration these TVs have very good black levels, detail in picture quality and color accuracy. You could spend hundreds more in the "S". . . brand names ( yes, ALL three of them) and not get a better picture or features. Many times guests in our home were astonished at the realism of images on our TVs. Sometimes in HD news casts or documentaries people on the screen appear so lifelike it is amazing! Almost 3D. And movies that have had the benefit of an excellent cinematographer and post production editor look so natural and true. Films like Baraka, Sea Biscuit, The Fall, and even CGI heavy hitters like Transformers, Avatar, and others are just stunning.

And the Off The Air reception of the built in tuner gives such great performance when football, golf, tennis and hockey are on. Even Standard Definition channels look their best. And PBS specials such as "Nature" and "Nova" are beautiful, not to mention the travel shows such as Rick Steves or Rudy Maxa.

 

[Phase700b]

They all use glass screens now instead of plastic on the LED's so I think you will find light will impact both equally. at $2799 list the aquos is a good buy for what it offers, uses less electricity gives off less heat and is far thinner than the plasma.

All LED and standard CCFL back lighted LCD TVS do not use glass for the outer surface. Even the TVs that do have somewhat shiny screen are not necessarily glass.