• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Plasma/LCD/LED

So Panasonic Plasma it is unless I can find one of those fabled Pioneer Kuros ... and don't get the G1 series.

Does this about sum it up?
 
shawn1224 said:
So Panasonic Plasma it is unless I can find one of those fabled Pioneer Kuros ... and don't get the G1 series.

Does this about sum it up?
Click to expand...

I personally wouldn't even go after the KURO anymore. Their hardware is so damn old now that it wouldn't matchup to the new Panasonic Viera lines.
 
Plasma: "Old technology," that's the biggest reason it's so cheap. That said, a good plasma puts out one of the best pictures you can get. Phenominal color contrast, very dark blacks, and, as you noticed, it's cheap. Static images used to cause a "burn-in" effect that would leave a ghost image on your screen permanently, but that's all but completely gone.

The downside is that it's heavy, about 2x the weight of a similar size LCD, probably 4x the weight of an LED. Also, over time the colors will start to fade, but it'll still look great with 45,000+ hours on it.

LCD: To me, this is the sweet spot. LCD is also "old" technology but it's really in it's prime right now. A few years ago you'd be paying out the nose for an LCD larger than 47", now they're available all over the place. The contrast ratio has gotten MUCH better on these the past few years (Dynamic contrast on my May '07 LCD is 3,000:1, now most are 100,000:1 or better).

Downsides are few. The picture isn't going to be quite as "pop off the screen" as a really good Plasma or LED, but it'll still look fantastic. No worry at all with burn in or screen fade, although eventually pixels may die. It costs a bit more than Plasma (usually) but nowhere near as much as LED.

LED: This TV uses an LED backlight instead of an LCD backlight. That means you're getting deeper blacks and a much thinner panel, but that's about where the edge over the competition ends. While it's great to have a panel that's 2" thick, in my opinion it's not worth the premium over LCD.

Downsides are obvious: It costs alot. That's the same with any new "cutting edge" technology.

Personally, I'd go Plasma or LCD, LED just isn't worth the cost.
 
LCDs have one too many issues right now including motion lag (60 hz) and ghosting (120 hz) and washed out colors.. Fix these and I'd take LCD for sure. They have 240 hz that 'supposedly' fix some of the 60/120 problems but those are really expensive.
 
Kabob said:
Plasma: "Old technology," that's the biggest reason it's so cheap. That said, a good plasma puts out one of the best pictures you can get. Phenominal color contrast, very dark blacks, and, as you noticed, it's cheap. Static images used to cause a "burn-in" effect that would leave a ghost image on your screen permanently, but that's all but completely gone.

The downside is that it's heavy, about 2x the weight of a similar size LCD, probably 4x the weight of an LED. Also, over time the colors will start to fade, but it'll still look great with 45,000+ hours on it.

LCD: To me, this is the sweet spot. LCD is also "old" technology but it's really in it's prime right now. A few years ago you'd be paying out the nose for an LCD larger than 47", now they're available all over the place. The contrast ratio has gotten MUCH better on these the past few years (Dynamic contrast on my May '07 LCD is 3,000:1, now most are 100,000:1 or better).

Downsides are few. The picture isn't going to be quite as "pop off the screen" as a really good Plasma or LED, but it'll still look fantastic. No worry at all with burn in or screen fade, although eventually pixels may die. It costs a bit more than Plasma (usually) but nowhere near as much as LED.

LED: This TV uses an LED backlight instead of an LCD backlight. That means you're getting deeper blacks and a much thinner panel, but that's about where the edge over the competition ends. While it's great to have a panel that's 2" thick, in my opinion it's not worth the premium over LCD.

Downsides are obvious: It costs alot. That's the same with any new "cutting edge" technology.

Personally, I'd go Plasma or LCD, LED just isn't worth the cost.
Click to expand...

No such thing as an "LCD backlight" LCD is the display panel. It's either LED or CFL.
 
About a year and a half ago I got a 50" Samsung Plasma and I'm still very happy with it. About a week ago I got a 32" Samsung LCD for the bedroom, and size difference aside, Kabob isn't kidding when he mentions the weight. LCD TVs can have plastic screens, but Plasmas are glass. This means you have to be a bit more careful about transporting them, and they will definitely weigh more. If you plan on wall mounting it, definitely get help. I barely could manage getting mine on it's stand by myself and I'm a pretty big guy. It's worth it though; the picture quality - especially contrast - is second to none. While LCD TVs are bragging about 60Hz and 120Hz refresh rates, plasma TVs have a 600Hz refresh rate.

If there's one bit of advice I wish I'd have before buying, it's to spend the extra money on a higher end model of the same size, even if the tech specs appear to be the same. I got a lower end one that just had a less effective anti-glare but was otherwise identical thinking that since I watch mostly at night that it wouldn't matter. I now wish I'd spent the extra couple of hundred on the one with the better anti-glare for those times I do watch TV while the sun's out...
 
Tangent said:
If there's one bit of advice I wish I'd have before buying, it's to spend the extra money on a higher end model of the same size, even if the tech specs appear to be the same. I got a lower end one that just had a less effective anti-glare but was otherwise identical thinking that since I watch mostly at night that it wouldn't matter. I now wish I'd spent the extra couple of hundred on the one with the better anti-glare for those times I do watch TV while the sun's out...
Click to expand...

I'll do one better. Get the biggest screen you can comfortably handle (and that won't overcrowd the room) because inevitably you WILL wish you had a bigger TV. I was sure 42" would be perfect forever...about 6 months later my buddy got a 52" and I coveted it greatly. I wish I had at LEAST a 50" now (which sucks because you can get a heck of a 50" TV for what I paid for my 42" back in '07), if not a 55"+.
 
Personally I don't like the reflections from the glass on the plasmas. It also gives the image a glossy feel (like glossy photos).

I just prefer the more natural look of the LCD screen.
 
Kabob said:
I'll do one better. Get the biggest screen you can comfortably handle (and that won't overcrowd the room) because inevitably you WILL wish you had a bigger TV. I was sure 42" would be perfect forever...about 6 months later my buddy got a 52" and I coveted it greatly. I wish I had at LEAST a 50" now (which sucks because you can get a heck of a 50" TV for what I paid for my 42" back in '07), if not a 55"+.
Click to expand...

this is EXACTLY what happened to me. I bought a 42" LCD (LG) last april and now I'm shopping for a 60" or higher.. prolly stick the 42" in my bedroom or somethin
 
I need a nicer TV for my bedroom since it's difficult for me to fall asleep w/o one. I just might end up upgrading and buying a bigger TV for my living room and take my 42" Viera and putting it in the bedroom. I'm still uncertain though.
 
I'd love to put the 42" in the bedroom and get a bigger TV for the living room, but the 42" would absolutely dominate our bedroom, it's too big (since it has to sit on top of the dresser). When we move out of our apartment to an actual house though that might not be such a big issue.
 
I was going to settle for the 42".. you guys really don't think it's not big enough? I mean I could upgrade to the 46" but that one is $243 more (amazon vs amazon) :(
 
jamor said:
I was going to settle for the 42".. you guys really don't think it's not big enough? I mean I could upgrade to the 46" but that one is $243 more (amazon vs amazon) :(
Click to expand...

42" is more than big enough for a bedroom. If I was going to go the route of buying a new TV though, I would go 50"+ for the living room.
 
NYCHitman1 said:
42" is more than big enough for a bedroom. If I was going to go the route of buying a new TV though, I would go 50"+ for the living room.
Click to expand...


ehh. If I was putting it up on the wall and sitting 11+ feet away I'd care. I think I'll be fine with the 42.. I'd like to put that $243 to something else right now.
 
jamor said:
I was going to settle for the 42".. you guys really don't think it's not big enough? I mean I could upgrade to the 46" but that one is $243 more (amazon vs amazon) :(
Click to expand...

Depends on how far away from the TV you sit. In my current place the 50" is perfect. I might be able to squeeze up to a 60" in that spot, but that would be too much. The 50 gives me a nice big picture without it being a movie theater screen. Since this is in my living room and not a dedicated home theater room, there is an upper size limit beyond which it's just too much. In my last place anything more than a 42 would have been too big since the sofa was closer to the TV. If you have extra money to spend, use it on getting a higher end model, not a bigger version of a low to middle end model.
 
so just bought the sony ps3 bundle last night, and I have to say WOW this tv is great. the images look perfect, and when hooked up to my surround system its such a pleasant experience. built in wifi and DLNA are nice too
 
That is a good price plus Newegg doesn't charge tax unless you live in West Bubblef**k. I personally just am not a fan of Samsung TV's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom