Plasma VS. LCD

[MannyIsGod]

I don't want to say no one notices the difference, but honestly at 42 inches and lower I'm not sure many people will be able to tell.

[Evan]

can you all post links to the set ups you guys have so we can compare specs and prices
and does anyone really see the difference in 720 vs 1080

Here is what I got....

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-Vier.../dp/B00142HLV4

My dad liked it so much be bought one the same day and two of my buddies bought one within a month. Its a good value set. And by value I mean good quality without spending your entire savings...its not cheap.

Under 50" I just couldn't tell the difference when I was shopping although it looked slightly blocky in 1080 but looked great on 50" +.

As for the glare on Plasmas..the one I have has a nice anti glare coating on it. During sundown the light hits it and I can only see a glare on the black le bars and its minor.

I have a 720 and love it and I would have spent the extra cash on a 1080 if I could tell the difference. I think for my model it was an extra $450.

This is the best HD TV I could find under $1200 which was my budget.

As for recharging the gas?!?!? Maybe on the first generation but these things last 100,000 hours with is a extremely long time. A few decades of viewing.

Plasma look more natural. The problem is when you want to watch a full blown 1080p signal (blue ray films or games) - the higher resolution just kills the plasmas. But for regular programming and SD signals - I fully agree.

I mainly watch TV...no video games and regular DVD's look perfectly fine to me but I hear ya.

[exstatic]

I have one of each. I bought a 32" LCD for the master suite, and then when I wanted "big", I went with a 50" plasma. I looked at the large LCDs in my price range, but on sports, they tended to be more pixilated and blocky than a comparably priced plasma model, and usually more expensive by 10-15%. As for plasma lifespan, they have a 20 year half life, which means in 20 years, they'll be half as bright. Since the picture/theater choices all burn between 47 and 52%, in 20 years, I'll just max it out and have the same picture I have now.

[Evan]

Since the picture/theater choices all burn between 47 and 52%, in 20 years, I'll just max it out and have the same picture I have now.

exstatic

What do you mean by this?

[Evan]

And by the way...buy a HDTV from a store like Circuit City or Best Buy and buy the in home warranty. For $225-ish from CC I have in home service for 3 years.

[exstatic]

exstatic

What do you mean by this?

On the remote menu choice, you can choose from sports, movies, concerts, etc. as your setting. It shows you on a bar menu what the settings for contrast and brightness are. None of the settings have a brightness setting over 52%, so if my picture fades to half intensity, I'll just do a manual selection to 100% brightness and have what I have now.

I'll never keep the TV for 20 years, but then again, I won't have to do the mythological "plasma gas recharge" in 5 years, either.

[Evan]

On the remote menu choice, you can choose from sports, movies, concerts, etc. as your setting. It shows you on a bar menu what the settings for contrast and brightness are. None of the settings have a brightness setting over 52%, so if my picture fades to half intensity, I'll just do a manual selection to 100% brightness and have what I have now.

I'll never keep the TV for 20 years, but then again, I won't have to do the mythological "plasma gas recharge" in 5 years, either.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....ok I gotcha. Thank you for explaining.

I think that would degrade the picture a bit but there is some logic to that.

Yeah I would be stunned if I kept this TV for 10 years...as much as I like it I am sure at best it will be in a kids room (if I ever have one) or a spare bedroom.

And the half life is based on 6 hours a day viewing. Right now I watch maybe 2.5 a day on average.

[MannyIsGod]

I have an older model of that same TV Evan. Those sets really are great.

[Evan]

I have an older model of that same TV Evan. Those sets really are great.

I have no regrets.

I read the reviews of the newest model (which I bought in April this year) and the reviews of the previous 4 models and they were all superb. Almost every negative review came from shipping/repair issues with amazon and buying from a store eliminate that.

So the moral of the story is both LCD and Plasma are great and the difference has been minimized as time goes on, so buy what you can afford and read reviews.

[Spuradicator]

Plasma look more natural. The problem is when you want to watch a full blown 1080p signal (blue ray films or games) - the higher resolution just kills the plasmas. But for regular programming and SD signals - I fully agree.

What do you mean they just kill the plasmas? When you watch 1080p signul or blue ray films do they look ty on plasma?

[Slomo]

What do you mean they just kill the plasmas? When you watch 1080p signul or blue ray films do they look ty on plasma?

No I wouldn't say ty, specially compared to SD (which is what we all have been watching until recently), but unless you can afford a true HD plasma ($$$$$) the resolution is reduced and the HD signal is not displayed at full res. (typically 720p but not always) and when you compare that picture to the same on a true HD screen (1920x1080 pixels) it's not as good.

That's why LCD looks to be a better option right now (it was much closer just a year and a half ago), but you still need to pay attention at the processing of the LCD TVs since that plays a big role in the overall picture quality.

[Brutalis]

Thanks for the info in this thread folks. My dad is about to buy a new TV and finally getting rid of that big ole 32 inch. He and I both were confused on the difference.

[robino2001]

I know I've said this before on here and I'm sure I'll get the whole "those are ", etc... I have a 47" westinghouse LCD in the living room and a 32" in the bedroom. For the price, I honestly think the picture quality is more than good enough for me. The big knock on them is the black coloring isn't a true black - but that's true of many many tv's. The 47" can be found for $1200ish, the 32" for $500ish.

The main reason I'm posting this though is for the 720/1080 question. The 32" is 720p, it's small enough that 720p is good enough for it. The 47" is 1080p and yes, I can tell the difference between watching something in 720 or 1080 on that tv because of the size. Albeit, 720 is still fantastic compared to the standard 480, but I was able to see the difference switching my xbox 360 from 720 component to 1080 VGA... you can also tell the differences sometimes when some shows/sporting events are filmed in 720 vs 1080.

[Man of Steel]

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....ok I gotcha. Thank you for explaining.

I think that would degrade the picture a bit but there is some logic to that.

Yeah I would be stunned if I kept this TV for 10 years...as much as I like it I am sure at best it will be in a kids room (if I ever have one) or a spare bedroom.

And the half life is based on 6 hours a day viewing. Right now I watch maybe 2.5 a day on average.

Evan--

What a coincidence!

I just ordered the exact same model from Amazn about 30 minutes ago!

Great minds think alike...

[Evan]

Evan--

What a coincidence!

I just ordered the exact same model from Amazn about 30 minutes ago!

Great minds think alike...

everyone I know that got it loves it, including me. Very nice set.

[bobbybob0]

Start with:

http://hdtvtest.co.uk

Briefly, Plasma will have a better contrast but will consume way much more energy and their life expectancy sucks.

[Evan]

Start with:

http://hdtvtest.co.uk

Briefly, Plasma will have a better contrast but will consume way much more energy and their life expectancy sucks.

no

http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/S-...er.html?page=2

and 30 years is pretty long

[bobbybob0]

no

http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/S-...er.html?page=2

and 30 years is pretty long

And?

The 7 most power consuming are all plamas.

Even if you exclude the 60+ inches available only in plasma, at a given size a plasma will (generally) consume more than an LCD TV.

And for the 30 years, I know Panasonic has made a lot of improvement on the plasma technology but it doesn't mean contrast starts decreasing after 30 years, it means it get really unacceptable after 30 years.
LCD are much more stable in that regard.

And I'm not even talking about "marking" that will affect plasmas after displaying a fixed image for too long (PC or game display).

[tlongII]

LCD is the better technology between the two. It will eventually dominate the market.

[TDMVPDPOY]

when buyin a good lcd/plasma....ur better of buying seperate quality cables to get the best out of the product...

[Evan]

And?

The 7 most power consuming are all plamas.

Even if you exclude the 60+ inches available only in plasma, at a given size a plasma will (generally) consume more than an LCD TV..

you said "way much more energy"

on average does that look true?

[bobbybob0]

when buyin a good lcd/plasma....ur better of buying seperate quality cables to get the best out of the product...

Unless you need really long cables (15 ft) you won't notice any difference between expensive solutions like Monster Cables or standard cables.

Even less with HDMI connections.

you said "way much more energy"

on average does that look true?

Sorry I didn't know I was dealing with the semantics police.

Compare the latest Panasonic 42" plasma with either Sony, Toshiba, or Samsung equivalent products, it consumes ~25% more

[Spuradicator]

I think all this info has made my decision a little harder

[Evan]

I think all this info has made my decision a little harder

Here is the thing…their both great. LCD or Plasma. Get what you can afford and and just read reviews of the model on amazon.

[Spuradicator]

So what is best for watching sports?