New TV's, LCD or PLASMA?

Yvsa

Yvsa

Joined
May 18, 1999
Messages
15,395
Osiyo Gang,

Our old 55" big screen TV has played its program and Barbie and I are looking to get a new one only this time we're wanting one of the new wide screen models. We've both studied and looked at all the new models and new choices until we're both utterly confused and have no idea of which model to choose for both longevity and clarity of picture as well as cost, with longevity and cost being the primary. We're wanting one somewhere in the 46" to 50" range. ;) :) :cool:

And knowing that more than a few of you younger folks here have a helluva lot more knowledge about things electrical than us old geezers we've decided to ask y'alls opinion's..... So what model would y'all buy if you were getting a new one and why? :confused:

.
 
I have an LCD. As well as it being the household TV, I hook my computer up to it and use it as a monitor for the computer as well. :)

46 - 50" might be too big for a monitor though. Your head might get tired from moving left to right to see everything.
 
I went with an LCD. The pricing is right, and as long as you turn them off when you are done watching them, they should last you a good long time. The good thing is that they are getting cheaper and cheaper to buy.
 
I think you will want to go with at least a 52 incher because anything less will look small compared to your old 55 incher. I had a 46 inch rear projector TV for 15 years before it packed up, and I replaced it with a 52 inch LCD Toshiba. Now I wish I had ponied up the extra for the 60 incher.

It's a big purchase that you will have to live with afterwards, with big sceens bigger is usually better.
 
You know, you could always held "feed the children" and send that money over my way. :D Ok, thought I'd give it a try. As for the TV, I'd go with LCD. Plasma's are great and all but after a while they start to "die out". The color fades, they get a warped picture, and eventually just go out all together. LCD's usually have a longer life.
 
LCD tend to have a longer live span compared to Plasma from what I understand. The real difference to me is plasma does better with glare/light on it. But the cost of one and the life span kinda make it not work it. So LCD is the choice that I went with.
 
Go with the LCD.

Samsung has the highest customer satisfaction ratings.

Avoid cheapo brands you've never heard of.
 
Agree with the LCD and Samsung recommendations.

Also take into account viewing distance when selecting a size. In our cramped apartment, we only have about 7-8 feet of distance from our couch to the TV. This makes viewing anything over 46 inches very tireing on the eyes.
 
I went with LCD. The next one will also be LCD, unless something better comes along.

Why? Better longevity, significantly less power draw, and no ghosting. The plasmas are said to have a slightly better image (definitely more vibrant colors) at a given price point. There is no wrong answer; LCD was what made the most sense to me.
 
I'd make my choice based on:

1) what types of programs you mainly watch; and

2) the light conditions in the area where the set will be watched.

Plasma is regarded superior for fast paced action like in sports such as football and motor-racing. It also has a greater ability to display black scenes in movies, especially as found in Sci-Fi and action drama's.

LCD is catching up in these areas but isn't quite there yet. But where it is better than plasma is in lighted viewing conditions. Plasma gives its best results in subdued lighting. As mentioned, check whether the models you like have reflective or non-reflective screens as this could be a major issue as looking at a screen and seeing more reflections than picture is a pain.

IMO neither technology is as long lasting and reliable as the old Cat Ray Tube it is replacing plus there are other new technologies that could well be King of the Hill within the next five years.
 
Remember when Plasma flat screens first came out? They were $15K! 'course I wanted one, but just couldn't justify it with the amount of time I spend in front of the TV. Thought I'd wait until a 40-50" were in the $900-$1000 range. They finally got there early this year, and guess what? New technology I must have, Laser and new TMOS displays are introduced.

http://www.gizmag.com/mitsubishis-laservue-laser-tv-shipping-in-the-us/10293/
http://www.gizmag.com/next-gen-tmos-displays-mass-production/13167/

Shoot. Now I have to reset the clock and wait another 5 years for these puppies to drop to within reason.
 
Lot of misinformation here.

LCD is better in glare/direct light.

Power draw is similar. LCD power draw is constant no matter what is being displayed, plasmas use more power to produce lighter colors. So if you're watching a movie about caves, plasma will probably use less or same power, while in a movie about skiing the plasma will use more.

Plasma has slightly better picture quality (better differentiation of dark shades, primarily) and better color rendition. They are also generally better at rendering rapid movement (matters if you're a football fan!)

Plasmas used to have a shorter lifespan. This isn't really true anymore. Plasmas may exhibit a buzzing noise at high altitudes so if you live over 5K feet, that should probably make your decision right there.

I have a Samsung plasma; I really like the picture quality but I think Panasonics have better overall quality. I do agree that the "no-name" sets are generally a poor choice. The upscaling chips (what takes a standard definition signal and makes it "bigger" to fit the higher-definition screen) tend to be tons better in the higher-end models.

Really, the quality of the two is getting closer and the market seems to be moving towards LCDs, I think because they are getting cheaper to produce (more companies making them).
 
Yvsa,

I just heard on the radio yesterday that prices for TVs will drop DRASTICALLY on Black Friday (Kim Kammando radio show). In fact, all electronic goodies will see these drastic price drops probably due to the cxrappy economy. Here are some examples she gave... Blue Ray DVD players, $50; 32" LCD TVs, $200 or so; 46" LCD TVs, $600, etc.

If you and Barbie can wait a month, you should be able to score something really nice... cheap :)

I want to replace my Samsung 37" LCD with something in the 46" range. I LOVE Samsung TVs, and the Sony Bravia models rock too.
 
Plasma is MUCH better in my experience. You get darker blacks, better color saturation, much better response rate with no ghosting or fast movement artifacts. Ultimately, plasma looks much more like a high-end cinema screen, and LCD looks more like a computer monitor with aliasing etc...

Also, you can get an excellent 1080p Panasonic plasmas for not much more than $1000 for a 50".

Yes, they dim... but the dark secret of LCDs is that they dim also. However, most plasmas have a fair bit of brightness reserve (most will be around 60-70/100 brightness when originally calibrated)... and most of the burn-in problems have been eliminated nowadays.

However, if you need a) computer input or b) to watch the screen in bright sunlight, some LCDs would do better, as you can get LCD TVs with an anti-reflective coating, and Plasmas (as well as many other LCDs) have a fairly reflective glass cover.

This is my own personal experience, but my $800 (2 years ago) 42" 720p Philips plasma looks much better than any TV my friends have bought, including >$1500 LCDs (haven't compared to an LED-backlit one though, which would have more vivid color).
 
We did a lot of research and decided to go the LCD route. The deal killer for us was the glare from the plasma screens. Even in a darkened room you could still see it, and at least for me, I found it really distracting (OK, I might may be a little ADD ;)).

- Mark
 
Okay... so I read your actual question a bit too fast this a.m. (before any caffeine too).

With LCDs, you do loose some of the Blacks (it blocks up), however it is minor with some of the better models. Plasmas are more expensive, both to purchase and to run (require more power). The LCD technology is getting much better and if you push a 1080p image to one, you really won't notice the difference much.

This has been my experience. I'd say LCDs for now! And I still recommend waiting for Black Friday too :).
 
If Blu-ray players hit $50.00 I'm getting one. I've been in an internal struggle for a little while now since the Playstation 3 dropped in price. I want a decent Blu-ray player and with the added game support and now Netflix coming out for the PS3... I'm trying to justify that pricetag.

After we get the Blu-ray then it's on to a new TV and then surround sound system.
 
John Shields said:
If Blu-ray players hit $50.00 I'm getting one. I've been in an internal struggle for a little while now since the Playstation 3 dropped in price. I want a decent Blu-ray player and with the added game support and now Netflix coming out for the PS3... I'm trying to justify that pricetag.
Click to expand...

I had the same dilemma John. It was a dedicated Blu-ray or the PS3. In retrospect, I think I should have gotten the PS3. You can justify it by knowing that the PS3 is THE benchmark that they rate other Blu-ray players by. It has the BEST reproduction of images, etc. on the market... and you can play cool games on it :D. I just didn't have the extra $100 to get the PS3 at the time. I should have waited.

And yes... you'll need the surround sound, etc. once you get one :).

When I went to buy a player, the girlfriend was "what do you need one of THOSE for?"... right up until she saw a display Blu-ray movie at Best Buy. Then it was WE HAVE TO GET ONE OF THOSE!! Too funny.
 
I'd go with a plasma. As others have stated you get better fast action reproduction, power draw is about the same as LCD and darker detail is better. Do a reasonable break-in and you can play games on it if you wish. I recently spent about two months at the AVS Forum trying to sort out the same question and now have a Panasonic 42" G10. I am extremely happy with my choice. It also serves as computer monitor for my desktop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top