Plasma vs. LCD
- Thread starter Sharp67
- Start date
Plasma offer's much better blacks, but at the same time you have to deal with price tag issues and screen burning. LCDs had a viewing angle problem but that is clearing up with each day. Also blacks aren't so defined but picture quality is still amazing.
go with LCDs.
if i may recommend. Vizio or Samsung
go with LCDs.
if i may recommend. Vizio or Samsung
- Joined
- May 13, 2008
- Messages
- 2,897
Right now LCDs match Plasmas up to 40 inch or so, and in some cases are better. Plasma will consume much more current than LCD. I work at Costco and was in the Sales department for some time. Do not get a Vizio or anything cheap. I have a Sharp and i recommend them. How far do you sit from the screen when you watch? That determines how big your screen should be and there are online calculators.
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2008
- Messages
- 4,266
One thing to consider is the amount of light in the room you're putting the TV. Plasmas (because of the amount of glass they use) have pretty big glare problems if your room has several windows or a lot of ambient light. An LCD in the same room will will show significantly less glare.
I'll back up Badger on the suggestion of going with Samsung if you get an LCD. Their quality is far and away better than almost anything out there, and if you have the money to spend get the 120 MHz model - you'll see a definite difference.
I'll back up Badger on the suggestion of going with Samsung if you get an LCD. Their quality is far and away better than almost anything out there, and if you have the money to spend get the 120 MHz model - you'll see a definite difference.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2007
- Messages
- 6,091
LCD's
go with Samsung or Sony
Plasmas = burn in
go with Samsung or Sony
Plasmas = burn in
I'm not a TV expert, but I would go with the LCD tv.
Plasmas have burn in as Rogue said. If you are playing sale Halo 3 on a plasma, after a while of playing the mini-map will burn into your TV and will stay there permanently.
LCD's are cheaper, bigger, and don't have burn in. Only bad thing is dead/stuck pixels on a LCD sometimes, but that's something you will have to live with. For high quality get a SONY or a SAMSUNG. For a good cheap option go with the ACER...In my house I have a 42" Acer LCD and a 52" Samsung LCD...and the only difference is the lighting, and the way that the cords are in the back. The ACER has very bad S-Video cords, and HD cord placement, and they easily come out with the slighest knock on the cord.
Plasmas have burn in as Rogue said. If you are playing sale Halo 3 on a plasma, after a while of playing the mini-map will burn into your TV and will stay there permanently.
LCD's are cheaper, bigger, and don't have burn in. Only bad thing is dead/stuck pixels on a LCD sometimes, but that's something you will have to live with. For high quality get a SONY or a SAMSUNG. For a good cheap option go with the ACER...In my house I have a 42" Acer LCD and a 52" Samsung LCD...and the only difference is the lighting, and the way that the cords are in the back. The ACER has very bad S-Video cords, and HD cord placement, and they easily come out with the slighest knock on the cord.
Well, i know that plasma's life spans are only good for about 4 years, LCD and get images burned into the if you leave something there to long. I just a got new T.V. from Samsung its 56 inches and was the first 1080P DLP LED tv for about $1700. it has the nicest picture on it.
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2008
- Messages
- 264
We have a 42" Panasonic Plasma and I really like it a lot. We don't do any console gaming on it or anything so burn in isn't a problem. As for lifespan... I doubt that that will be a problem by the time this tv goes out I am sure that there will be something new on the market that I will be more than excited to get. I really love how dark the darks are when watching movies. That is what i mainly use it for. If I was going to get another tv I would get a LCD. I have seen a 50" Samsung LCD and I absolutely loved it.
- Joined
- May 13, 2008
- Messages
- 2,897
Technically Sony is the same as Samsung as they made their LCD in collaboration. From 2004 i think.
http://news.cnet.com/Samsung,-Sony-join-forces-on-LCDs/2100-1041_3-5171753.html
http://news.cnet.com/Samsung,-Sony-join-forces-on-LCDs/2100-1041_3-5171753.html
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2008
- Messages
- 4,266
That's not quite right. Yes, they use the same TFT's, but that does not make them the same. The electronics and algorithms used to display the images are different, so they are not the same TVs.
Alright I wasnt going to post here but since so many of you are telling Sharp incorrect information I figured it was time to step in lol. Now by no means am I saying any of your suggestions are wrong. In fact I'm not even going to suggest either one. I sold TVs and serviced them for quite some time up until last year when I changed occupations.
Myth #1:
Plasmas dont last as long as LCD's. <<<< FALSE
In fact most Plasmas and LCD now-a-days have then same MTBF of around 50,000 to 70,000 working/viewing hours.
Myth #2:
Plasmas are more expensive. <<<< FALSE
Since LCD's were originally made in smaller sizes, making an LCD in a larger size isnt very easy (or cheap) for the manufacturer. LCD's in the 37-47" range have dropped price quite a bit recently but plasmas on end are usually cheaper for the same size since plasma displays arent made in sizes smaller than 37 (and you can only find those in business applications). When you hit the 50"+ range LCDs are more expensive w/ comparable plasmas on average.
Myth #3:
Plasmas Burn in <<<< True (but very hard)
Yes, Plasmas do burn in and 1st generation plasmas did burn in relatively quickly (2-3 hours of a static image). Newer plasmas take 10+ hours of a constant static image to burn in the picture and just about every plasma now has many safegaurds against that, most have a slow image displacement that doesnt keep the same pixel always lit the same, there are many other screen saver types out there. Wouldnt recommend for extended PC use, plus most dont scale the desktop well unless you get a 1080p Plasma.
Other bullet points:
Yes most plasmas do have a glare due to the reflective outter glass. With the only exception being Panasonic who just came out w/ some 1080p plasmas w/ an anti-reflective coating on the outside.
Some LCD's do have a small Viewing angle problem by comparison but it is at a very radical angle. No one would want to sit at that angle to begin with.
Plasmas do have better Blacks (contrast ratios) but LCD's usually offer better detail (except for 1080p plasmas where its the same). LCD's do use MUCH less power than a plasma, especially the newer ones backlit by LED's which also means some even thinner/lighter LCD panels.
Most LCD's dont scale 4:3 Standard Definition pictures as well as most plasmas. Thats because LCD's look best when its a 1:1 Native ratio (screen's physical pixels matches the input's pixels). With the exception of 1080p (1920x1080), most plasmas have an odd pixel count (1024x768, 1024x1080) which means that the 640x480 lines of SD tv broadcast dont have to scale as much as they do w/ a standard 720p LCD (1366x768, 1280x720)
It all depends on how much you want to spend, how far away you sit (like frank said about screen size), what you plan to use it for (SDTV, HDTV, PC ect.), how bright your room is ect ect.
For anyone who thinks that what I said was biased, I have a 47" 1080p Toshiba LCD in my window covered living room hooked to HD Sat and a 42" 1024x1080i Hitachi Plasma in my much smaller, barely lit bedroom on SD Sat w/ my 360 hooked up. Both have pros and cons and work better in one situation than the other.
Myth #1:
Plasmas dont last as long as LCD's. <<<< FALSE
In fact most Plasmas and LCD now-a-days have then same MTBF of around 50,000 to 70,000 working/viewing hours.
Myth #2:
Plasmas are more expensive. <<<< FALSE
Since LCD's were originally made in smaller sizes, making an LCD in a larger size isnt very easy (or cheap) for the manufacturer. LCD's in the 37-47" range have dropped price quite a bit recently but plasmas on end are usually cheaper for the same size since plasma displays arent made in sizes smaller than 37 (and you can only find those in business applications). When you hit the 50"+ range LCDs are more expensive w/ comparable plasmas on average.
Myth #3:
Plasmas Burn in <<<< True (but very hard)
Yes, Plasmas do burn in and 1st generation plasmas did burn in relatively quickly (2-3 hours of a static image). Newer plasmas take 10+ hours of a constant static image to burn in the picture and just about every plasma now has many safegaurds against that, most have a slow image displacement that doesnt keep the same pixel always lit the same, there are many other screen saver types out there. Wouldnt recommend for extended PC use, plus most dont scale the desktop well unless you get a 1080p Plasma.
Other bullet points:
Yes most plasmas do have a glare due to the reflective outter glass. With the only exception being Panasonic who just came out w/ some 1080p plasmas w/ an anti-reflective coating on the outside.
Some LCD's do have a small Viewing angle problem by comparison but it is at a very radical angle. No one would want to sit at that angle to begin with.
Plasmas do have better Blacks (contrast ratios) but LCD's usually offer better detail (except for 1080p plasmas where its the same). LCD's do use MUCH less power than a plasma, especially the newer ones backlit by LED's which also means some even thinner/lighter LCD panels.
Most LCD's dont scale 4:3 Standard Definition pictures as well as most plasmas. Thats because LCD's look best when its a 1:1 Native ratio (screen's physical pixels matches the input's pixels). With the exception of 1080p (1920x1080), most plasmas have an odd pixel count (1024x768, 1024x1080) which means that the 640x480 lines of SD tv broadcast dont have to scale as much as they do w/ a standard 720p LCD (1366x768, 1280x720)
It all depends on how much you want to spend, how far away you sit (like frank said about screen size), what you plan to use it for (SDTV, HDTV, PC ect.), how bright your room is ect ect.
For anyone who thinks that what I said was biased, I have a 47" 1080p Toshiba LCD in my window covered living room hooked to HD Sat and a 42" 1024x1080i Hitachi Plasma in my much smaller, barely lit bedroom on SD Sat w/ my 360 hooked up. Both have pros and cons and work better in one situation than the other.
Similar threads
