Plasma vs LCD: Which is right for you?

By Randolph Ramsay on 05 December 2007

Tags: comparison | digital | flat | lcd | plasma | screen | tv | versus

Get Adobe Flash player

Update: If you're in the market for a flat screen television, then you probably have one big question you want answered: plasma vs LCD, which is right for me?

The two different camps of flat panel display standard will, of course, gladly spruik the advantages of their own standard and the deficiencies of the other. But which type of display, plasma or LCD, is better? And which will give you more bang for your buck?

1. Plasma and LCD - what's the difference? | 2. Picture quality | 3. Plasma's advantages over LCD | 4. LCD's advantages over plasma | 5. Which is better value? | 6. Do I need to buy 1080p?

1. Plasma and LCD technology - what's the difference?
Plasma and LCD panels may look similar, but the flat screen and thin profile is where the similarities end. Plasma screens, as its name suggests, uses a matrix of tiny gas plasma cells charged by precise electrical voltages to create a picture. LCD screens (liquid crystal display) are in layman's terms sandwiches made up of liquid crystal pushed in the space between two glass plates. Images are created by varying the amount electrical charge applied to the crystals. Each technology has its strengths and weaknesses, as you'll read below.



Samsung's 1080p 46-inch LA46M81BDX LCD TV

2. Is there a difference in picture quality between plasma and LCD screens and normal CRT TVs?
It's not what's happening behind the screen that's important - it's how the screen performs as a television that matters the most. In that regard, both plasma and LCD sets produce excellent pictures, although many home entertainment specialists and gamers still say CRTs produce the best overall images (although the latest plasmas are particularly good, and LCD sets are quickly catching up in terms of quality).

Those same home entertainment specialists will tell you that for basic home theatre-like usage, plasma screens have a slight edge over LCDs. This is because plasma screens can display blacks more accurately than LCDs can, which means better contrast and detail in dark-coloured television or movie scenes. The nature of LCD technology, where a backlight shines through the LCD layer, means it's hard for it to achieve true blacks because there's always some light leakage from between pixels. This is steadily improving with every new generation of LCD, however.

3. What advantages does plasma have over LCD?
Apart from better contrast due to its ability to show deeper blacks, plasma screens typically have better viewing angles than LCD. Viewing angles are how far you can sit on either side of a screen before the picture's quality is affected. You tend to see some brightness and colour shift when you're on too far of an angle with LCDs, while a plasma's picture remains fairly solid. This is steadily changing, however, with more and more LCDs entering the market with viewing angles equal to or greater than some plasmas. Plasmas can also produce a brighter colour, once again due to light leakage on an LCD affecting its colour saturation.

Plasma pundits will also tell you that some LCD screens have a tendency to blur images, particularly during fast moving scenes in movies or in sports. While that was true for older generation LCD screens, newer models have improved significantly -- so much so that the differences in performance between LCDs and plasmas in this regard is almost negligible (here's a tip -- if you're shopping for LCDs, check the pixel response time, measured in ms. The lower it is, the better the image quality in fast moving scenes).



A new 42" plasma from Hitachi

Traditionally, the biggest advantage plasmas have had over their LCD cousins is price, particularly in the large screen end of the market. In the past 12 months, this has changed, with LCDs matching or even beating plasmas in both resolution and price. Plasmas being sold in Australia generally run between 42-inches and 63-inches wide, with the cheapest standard definition 42-inch selling for approximately AU$2,300 (although you can expect to find sets cheaper than AU$2,000 in real world prices). 60-inch and above plasmas can go for as much as $25,000.

LCDs, on the other hand, generally top out around the 52-inch mark -- though there is now a ludicrously expensive 70-inch Sony available -- but are incredibly competitive with similar-sized plasmas. In the six months since we last updated this feature, prices of the replacements of two flagship TVs have dropped by a third. Sony's high end 52-inch KDL52W3100 LCD, for example, retails for AU$6,799 (down from AU$9,999), while Pioneer's top of the line 50-inch PDP-LX508A plasma goes for AU$$7,999 (down from AU$10,999).

4. What advantages does LCD have over plasma?
Apart from being price competitive, LCD has the edge over plasma in several other key areas. LCDs tend to have higher native resolution than plasmas of similar size, which means more pixels on a screen.

LCDs also tend to consume less power than plasma screens, with some estimates ranging that power saving at up to 30 per cent less than plasma. LCDs are also generally lighter than similar sized plasmas, making it easier to move around or wall mount.

LCD pundits also point to the fact that LCDs have a longer lifespan than plasma screens. This was true of earlier plasma models, which would lose half of their brightness after more than 20,000 hours of viewing. Later plasma generations have bumped that up to anything between 30,000 and 60,000 hours. LCDs, on the other hand, are guaranteed for 60,000 hours.

You might have also heard that plasmas suffer from screen burn in, an affliction not as commonly associated with LCDs. Screen burn in occurs when an image is left too long on a screen, resulting in a ghost of that image burned in permanently. Newer plasmas are less susceptible to this thanks to improved technology and features such as screen savers, but burn-in is still a problem. But after a few days of use most burnt-in images will fade -- they are no longer permanent.



Sharp's Aquos LC37AX3X

5. Which is better value for me right now: plasma or LCD?
If you're in the market for a big screen television -- and we're talking 50-inches and above -- then we'd suggest plasma as a safe bet. Plasmas give you more bang for your buck at the big end of town, and while LCDs can give you better resolution, plasma still has the edge in terms of picture quality. One other thing to look for, whether you opt for plasma or LCD, is an integrated tuner -- many TVs still have analogue tuners, which look pretty terrible on a large screen. Try to get a model with an inbuilt HD tuner if you can.

At the smaller end of things (15" to 42" TVs), LCD is the only way to go if you want something slim and tasteful. And the best thing is that LCDs are getting cheaper all the time.

6. Do I need to buy 1080p?
If you're a true high-def junkie who's keen to see every pixel of a high-res 1080i/p image reproduced pixel-by-pixel (providing you have a source that high, of course), then LCDs are seemingly the way to go. However, top-of-the line plasmas will also display 1080p content, so the choice isn't as easy as it once was.
Despite the current HD buzz, there is still very little content available in 1080p -- especially compared to the infinite amount of SD content like TV programs and DVDs. Though buying 1080p now may mean you get some degree of futureproofing, you may not be getting the best picture. It's not all about the resolution. For example, one of the best TVs we've seen yet is only 720p (HD) compliant -- the Pioneer PDP-508XDA -- and yet 1080p content still looks better on it than on any LCD you could name. Unless you measure your screen size in metres, 1368 x 768 resolution could still be enough for your needs.


Latest plasma reviews
Latest LCD reviews

Like this article? Click below to send it to your mobile for free!

will
16/05/2005 05:15 PM

I don't agree that Plasma's have better blacks than LCD's. A visit to any TV store will show LCD's have blacker blacks. In fact Plasmas have very poor blacks when fading to black between sceens. The Plasma goes to grey, at least on my new LG DT50PY10. Lowering the brightness does not produce a better black. Will

Report offensive content

none
31/07/2005 04:34 PM

amateur information. i hear the same things told to screen noobs by harvey norman workers. one glaring ridiculous statement: lcd's offer higher resolutions at bigger screen size. wrong. and even if they did what would be the point? the best images being broadcast at the moment are only utilising 720 vertical lines. which means that 1024x768 is the most you'll need. for a very long time. high def dvd's which aren't even being mass produced yet will use 720p or 1080i. so until a higher definition format comes along - i'm thinking 3-5 years (with the exception of content created at home with a super computer) - 1024x768 will be spot on for digital telivision and digital discs. and burn in on plasmas is still a huge issue. i've had burn in on fujitsu's latest high def plasma (not cheap at $7,000). burn in on a philips high def - $6k. burn in on lg's latest - $5.5k. the only screen i'm aware of that seems impervious to screen burn (purely personal experience) is the pioneer retail high def plasmas; 435hd, 505hd.

Report offensive content

FORDXR
11/02/2006 11:46 PM

Why does this state that a *lower* refrsh rate is better for fast action? Surely the more times per second the screen is updated, the better fast action sequences will be displayed? Because 8ms (^millisecond) is *lower* then say 12ms, likewise 4ms is *lower* then 8ms and so on, therefore a screen that can refresh *lower* is better. ^One thousandth of a second.

Report offensive content

kien725
17/02/2006 12:06 PM

the lower the refresh rate say.. 12MS (12 milliseconds) means the screen refreshes every 0.012 seconds. the LOWER the refresh rate means the FASTER it will refresh. i dont exactly know how it directly affects the output.. but typically, you'll see some performance difficulty in fast or highly pixeled output on the screen. say some sports as it mentioned, the higher the refresh rate the slower it wil reprocess the information put on screen which will definately make the output distorted, slurred, blurred, freeze for a second.. this knowledge is from computer lcd monitors, 8MS is highly reputable, 12MS has set the standards for better quality.. and 16MS is complete crap.

Report offensive content

Bobby Christy
25/03/2006 05:40 AM

After comparing Plasma and LCD, it would seem to me, one would have to suspend intelligence totally to even consider the selection of Plasma. The "burn-in" factor, alone, should eliminate even a momentary consideration of a plasma t.v.. Add to this the fact that plasma screens are soft and scratch easily (which isn't mentioned), plasma uses more electricty..i.e. run hotter (heat shortens life), their heavier, and on and on. BobC

Report offensive content

John
28/03/2006 08:54 PM

Apparently, some people are confused about the definition of the word "rate" as opposed to the definition of the word "time". They are the exact inverses of each other -- as one goes up, the other one goes down. A low refresh "time" is a good thing, and so is a high refresh "rate". For example, 8 milliseconds is a shorter refresh time than 12 milliseconds, and of course it means better performance -- the refresh time is shorter. The refresh rate of an 8 ms screen is higher than the refresh rate of a 12 ms screen, since the screen with the 8 ms refresh time gets updated more often -- at a higher rate -- than the 12 ms screen.

Report offensive content

Quick Brown Fox
10/04/2006 04:05 AM

The source of the confusion over 'refresh rate' stems from common computing terminology when decribing refesh rate... typically it is described in terms of FPS (frames per second) in which case higher is faster, or MHz (megahurtz)in which higher is also faster. If refresh rate is described in Ms (milli-seconds) however lower is faster.

Report offensive content

Ezkii
16/04/2006 03:33 AM

It's fair enough to say you hear amateur Harvey Norman workers say to screen noobs that lcd offers higher resolutions at bigger screen sizes, it is in fact true, the pixels dont get any bigger so in reality the screen is a higher hardware resolution, software limits the resolution, the software is upgradeable as the new technology comes in. You also say that 1080i/576p is as high as things will be for 3-5 years, try 6 months, i gather you havent heard of a thing called blu-ray destined to hit the aussie market in aug-sept this year and will hit with a massive sales push with over 2000 movies availiable in aus by years end. As far as burn-in goes, thats true, burn in will occur on a crappy plasma after a static image has been on for about 30 mins, unless you have a very old plasma this will burn out over a few hours of general use, not a biggie for general home theatre use. LCD is fast becoming the better technology, but buy on what your eyes like not what you read. I have found the people at Harvey Norman to be massively qualified in what they tell people (unlike certain other places i have been with the initials R, & GG) and would happily pay any extra just for their qualified service (i havent had to pay extra yet, they have always been cheaper). And yes the Pioneer plasma will possibly be my next purchase, you are right, thay are brilliant.

Report offensive content

Zeb
19/04/2006 02:08 AM

One problem with this article is the lack of mention in playing video games on either. Plasma can easily suffer burn-in when playing games that have static interface components, and they also tend to blurr the images when you are playing any game with rapid movement. If you have any kind of game system hooked up to your TV, go LCD.

Report offensive content

Brendan
20/04/2006 01:09 PM

Wait theres more! the NEW technology is called SED! Surface-conduction electron-emitter display, or SED. SED technology, developed in conjunction with Toshiba/Cannon, yields images of superior quality to liquid-crystal or plasma screens while consuming far less power. SED displays operate on the same principle as cathode-ray television, emitting light by shooting electrons into a phosphor-coated screen. But where cathode-ray TVs use a SINGLE large electron gun that has to be set back from the glass screen (meaning they're usually as deep as they are wide), SED screens are illuminated with MILLIONS of tiny electron guns known as emitters that can be aimed at point-blank range, enabling images to be projected across wide screens only a few centimeters deep. ITS a flat piece of flexible metal that is lighter stronger cheaper and far far better!! should be due late this year or early the next - stick with your rear projections and skip LCD and PLASMA as the new wave is coming!

Report offensive content

byron
25/04/2006 10:19 PM

They didn't mention that plasma tvs don't work in high elevation like Denver, etc. I hear they are coming out with some fixes but those tvs will cost a lot more.

Report offensive content

Manish
07/08/2006 01:11 PM

Toshiba Delays SED -- SED technology is far yet, yes brendon thanks for the info about SED TVs but can't wait for it. See this article... Toshiba Delays SED Highly anticipated HDTV technology pushed back. by Gerry Block March 9, 2006 - Toshiba and Canon have announced official plans for launching their jointly developed SED (Surface-conduction Electron-emitter Display) Hi-Def TV technology. The first stage of mass production will begin in July 2007, and the first models will launch at retail in the fourth quarter of 2007. The announcement comes as a bit of a disappointment to fans of the technology, as there had previously been speculation that SED could roll out by the end of 2006. On paper, and in demonstrations, SED technology is impressive, able to produce 1080p resolution with 100,000:1 contrast ratio and less than 1 millisecond response time, essentially taking the best characteristics of HD-CRTs and integrating them in plasma-sized panels. Toshiba and Canon cited the 2008 Olympics in Beijing as the focus of the two companies' promotion efforts when SED displays are ready for the public.

Report offensive content

jon
08/08/2006 07:27 PM

To prevent confusion the refresh rate as mentioned in the above article should be referred to as the pixel response time. all LCD/plasma TVs have a refresh rate of 50-Hz. Its the pixel response time that will define how good the screen is with moving pictures.

Report offensive content

r.s.p
18/08/2006 04:16 PM

will - first problem for you is you bought an LG... As for burn in, technology these days is eliminating burn is as best as it possibly can and the television networks are doing their part also, watermarks are moving around the screen all the time and also altering colours and angles to avoid burn in as best as possible. As one of those salespeople that talks to 'noobs', you'll really only get a burn in effect if you pause a dvd and go talk on the phone for 3-4 hours...

Report offensive content

Rebecca
28/08/2006 11:22 PM

I am currently in the market for a 42 inch flatscreen tv. Every shop we go to sways us in different directions and gives us different info. We were sure we wanted LCD although in Dublin it is hard to get LCD over 30 odd inches without paying mega money. We heard about the burn, and were basically swayed towards LCD but yesterday we nearly bought a 42inch plasma (Samsung) We were told that Plasma have caught up with LCD and LCD are now really trying to catch up with Plasma! That the burn doesnt really happen anymore, the heat after running a while is the same etc... Now were so unsure, it will be wall mounted and were going to get a home entertainment system etc. Any suggestions?

Report offensive content

reader
06/09/2006 10:02 PM

Read the exact same content on: http://infotech.indiatimes.com/quickiearticleshow/msid-1956347.cms CNet is sharing content?

Report offensive content

George Hollops
06/09/2006 10:19 PM

I agree with all the details in regards to comments made here by the website. In regards to the comments by "will", please you need to get yourself a pair of glasses, if you think that an LCD has better blacks than Plasma

Report offensive content

Michael
08/09/2006 12:12 PM

This article is dated "31 January 2006". Date is an important thing for this subject, please correct it! Is it supposed to be 2005??? Are LCDs already better and cheaper by now? Rate means refreshes per second. Higher is better! Lower response time is better. Please look up "rate" in the dictionary if you are having trouble. LCDs easily win in my book.

Report offensive content

Advokit
10/09/2006 07:22 PM

The term for measuring the speed of an LCD is actually reffered to as "Response Time" ie: 8Ms for one pixel to go from Black to white to black again. Refresh rate has nothing to do with it. We are along way away before anyone manufactures an LCD with any less than a true 8Ms panel. Personally I would still by a Plasma if I was after a 42" Television, the blacks are better and they are much nicer to watch a normal broadcast on.

Report offensive content

David Grees
15/09/2006 08:05 AM

An Important Issue I don't believe I read was that Plasma Screens tend to Reflect more Ambient Light almost mirror like reflections, LCD's tend to absorb or defract bright lights or Sunlight making it more disireable in brightly lit rooms.

Report offensive content

Nick Fox
27/09/2006 10:01 AM

Sounds like a plug for plasma TV's. A 30% energy reduction for LCD's is significant and just think how much CO2 would not be produced if we al used them.

Report offensive content

Spike
06/10/2006 09:07 PM

Will - I must seriously disagree with you. You should not be judging a plasma and and an LCD based on in-store lighting. The "normal" lighting of your living room, including natural light, is NOT at all best represented by stores. Plasma hands down will create deeper blacks based on the difference of the technology alone. LCDs at best have a 178° viewing angle before washout happens, ok. But a plasma does not depreciate from ANY angle, unless of course you are standing behind it. For large screen viewing (42" and above) do yourself a favour and go plasma, built for motion picture. LCD on the other hand was built for static imaging. No brainer.

Report offensive content

John
07/10/2006 06:40 AM

All of this is irrelevent if you are going to Best Buy to buy your TV because it is all a big racket. Whatever TV they want you to buy for whatever reason, say they have a stock of Samsungs, they will dial up the brightness and dial down the brightness on other models to get you to buy it. If you are going from projection to lcd or plasma you will notice a huge difference. Find the best bang for your buck and buy it. Research the numbers and don't buy the one that looks best on the showroom floor because I guarantee you there has been picture manipulation. Also, warranty warranty warranty! These displays are $$$$ so get one with a good warranty.

Report offensive content

cnet hater
11/10/2006 07:33 AM

To "will", when you walk in a store and compare the television, have you check if they are tuned in the same setting (e.g. 50% brightness, 50%contrast). Store can easily trick you with these kind of setup.

Report offensive content

sam
11/10/2006 12:50 PM

i bought an LG 42" plasma 2 years ago, and its already finished.. a panel failure and some other bs failure. not under warranty and company wants $3000 to fix it, bought the damn thing for $4200

Report offensive content

b
15/10/2006 09:33 AM

i say just buy both in my house we cant live without tv so we bout 2 diffrent 58 inch tv's they are both good im planning to buy tvs for the bathroom

Report offensive content

Barrington
29/10/2006 12:47 PM

1)I haven't read this page yet, but asking the question, 'Plasma vs LCD: Which is right for you?' is the wrong question!!! 2) My priority is to continue to carryout a, 'Feasibility Study' (research to decide on the best value for money HD TV), until I decide to buy an high definition (HD) TV. This would include comparing all the different types of at least 1920x1080p televisions on the market; LCD, Plasma, LoCOS (probably become cheaper and better performance than LCD), SED, DLP, Projectors (Front and Rear) and if somebody creates a brilliant HD CRT I would have to take it into account also! 3) It is obvious that there are not only; weaknesses but strengths for both Plasmas Vs LCDs but some models would have substantially; reduced or actually solved their type (plasma or LCD) problems. For example Public LCD suffers from fixed pixels but probably only one company in the world has solved the problem !!! 4) Whilst there are editors and people who like to claim that the argument is about Plasma Vs LCD: Which is right for you? It is complete balderdash and explain the extent of ignorance, which I have faced without naming names! What counts when I decide to buy an HD TV that it is value for money and it satisfy my needs. 4) Therefore, I have always bought products based on the quality and the value for money of for example the actual item and definitely not based on for example a manufacturer's reputation. 5) If a manufacturer with an excellent reputation makes a bad product which I am aware of and there is a much better product on the market then I shall buy it.

Report offensive content

Aah Kay
30/10/2006 12:02 PM

The article writer meant to say either "less time between refreshes" or "higher refresh rate". The two terms mean the same thing. A high refresh rate means that there are more refreshes per second. Doesn't the word refresh look silly if you read it often enough.

Report offensive content

Aah Kay
30/10/2006 12:02 PM

The article writer meant to say either "less time between refreshes" or "higher refresh rate". The two terms mean the same thing. A high refresh rate means that there are more refreshes per second. Doesn't the word refresh look silly if you read it often enough.

Report offensive content

brian simpson
16/11/2006 05:30 PM

After reading most of the comments here I come to the conclusion that most of the public are "plebs". You read all the specs and use that as your "bible". Get real folks I work in a Hifi store and sell NEC, Fujitsu, Pioneer domestic studo and 1080p models as well as Panasonic PLASMA screens. I also carry a couple of LCD brands...good ones. And let me tell you...for free..plasma screens crap all over LCD. Open your eyes or get your cataracs removed!!!! Hell I'm no Einstein but I can see the difference. Forget specs they tell you what the manufacturer wants you to believe. As for screen burn, pixel loss, power consumtion, both can loose pixels...but rare with good brands. I've seen screen burn on both but will dissappear...on good brands so be carefull not to let it happen. And when you calculate power consumption plasma is about 10% more, not with Pioneer 1080p so forget about it were all gunna die soon anyway! Come on public ask a guy who sells the good brands he'll know. He won't sell either LCD or Plasma if it's too cheap cos they're all crap and more importantly wont last long!!! End of story....and fact

Report offensive content

brian simpson
16/11/2006 05:43 PM

Barrington, read about HDMI 1.3 and you will find it is only usefull on 1466p, an industry standard not? to be seen on the domestic scene. 1.2 will not diminish any audio signals including dolby hd etc etc. It's all out there if you take time to find out about it.

Report offensive content

GAMER
20/11/2006 11:42 AM

i am a hardcore gamer and looking to buy a ps3 or xbox 360 what tv will be the best for me?

Report offensive content

big m
22/11/2006 01:31 PM

i'm shopping too. but it seems pretty split on whats better. guess i'll flip a coin at teh store.

Report offensive content

Brad
19/12/2006 04:20 AM

Anyone here care to comment on importance of 3,000 :1 versus 10,000 :1 contrast ratio, and of 9M colors versus 27M? I see a rather inexpensive 50" Plasma in the TH-50HD8UK from Panasonic, but it's solely a monitorn (no tuner or sound), which is OK for me, but also the lower CR and color pallette. Thanks. Brad

Report offensive content

ben
31/12/2006 02:29 AM

here's a tip -- if you're shopping for LCDs, check the refresh rate. The lower it is, the better the image quality in fast moving scenes). in this statement would it not be better having a higher refresh rate rather than a lower refresh rate

Report offensive content

D Merrick
02/01/2007 03:44 PM

I bought a ***y plasma and the picture was fabulous until the panel failed. i was quoted $3400 to repair it. The repair cost is more than the retail price was. The viewing hours were rated at 30,000: we did not make it. Product was manufactured Nov. 2004. Bought in March 2005 panel failed in 11/2006. Still waiting for manufacture to step up. Bottom line is even with this mishap, The plasma is the way to go in my opinion. Choose carefully.

Report offensive content

douglasvb
10/01/2007 04:57 PM

I have been selling Plasma, and LCD for more than 5 years. Never once have I seen a burn in issue with a plasma TV. Plasma TV's are equally as likely to burn in as CRT's, which means, If you leave a survalence camera on the screen for a year, Yes it will burn in. LCD's however are less likely to burn in than CRT's, but c'mon plasma looks so much better! The TV's we have on display Pioneer, Toshiba, LG Run 12 hours a day, every day. I have a pioneer plasma that was on our display for 4 years! (Flag ship model). I now have that TV on my wall, and it looks as good as the day we put it up 4 years ago. Plasma all the way! PS: I also use my pioneer plasma as a PC display, as it is my media center monitor.

Report offensive content

UnFingKnown
12/01/2007 06:41 PM

Brand new 2007 wide screen HDTV plasmas have better picture then brand new HDTV LCD's picture!Enough said.... =)

Report offensive content

Me
13/01/2007 11:31 AM

I am planning to buy a Panasonic 42PV600A plasma. Some of the Role playing games i play have small static boxes in the corners on-screen for the duration of the level. Is this a problem for today's plasmas? thanks

Report offensive content

djwazza
16/01/2007 05:41 AM

Is a 25 millisecond response time going to make the screen blur/tear if playing a 60fps game on the xbox 360?

Report offensive content

Johno
18/01/2007 03:56 PM

djwazza, Yes, 25 ms is too slow for high speed action, whether it's from broadcast TV signal or from dvd player/game console etc.

Report offensive content

Dano
18/01/2007 06:10 PM

good luck to you all , your reading in to it just alittle too much ...i did the same found it really did come back to purley personal choice, burn in i believe is .."you get what you pay for " any way after checking them out in hong kong and london whilst traveling, i came back to my local and ended buying the pioneer "506".the price was on par,and i got free instalation& del. If you r realy trying to out smart them all, you can't go past the 13-15k pioneer , but remember in ten years time they too will only be 4-5k. just look at the whole picture .dan.

Report offensive content

Bill
21/01/2007 01:37 AM

ok, I've read all this and still haven't got a clue....

Report offensive content

Tggirl29
24/01/2007 06:24 AM

I read all the comments..I have gone to three major stores. (In which all is trying to sell me a different brand) I have also done alot of reading about both Plasma and LCD on the internet...I get so confused on which is better and which isnt. I know that the LCD 1080 are good for gaming and computer. rite now there is nothing for the 1080 except blue ray and all the other dvd stuff coming out but whatever...And I love nascar racing and I record alot with my DVR. (which is thru my digital cable company) I want a 42in tv...but i heard that lcd is good for the reflection issues and if u have alot of sunlight in the room...but lcd dont come in 42 by brands I like...But I just need to know what is the best brand...I also want good sound quality for movies...i am not looking to play games on the tv or hook up my computer...could someone please tell me what is a good brand for a 42in plasma....also is it true that plasma doesnt have a ghostly image...i love sports(like nascar) and don't want a tv with that. thanks..and please help...i am going insane trying to pick out a tv

Report offensive content

anonymous
25/01/2007 05:06 PM

Probably wait another year till true 1080p tv's become more affordable

Report offensive content

Naseer Siddiqui
26/01/2007 03:47 AM

I am truly confused with all comments. I would like to buy LCD, but would like to know, if they make more than 40". They say that the resolution become weaker as they grow bigger in size. At the same time, I feel that Plasma can be a better option, because of its motion picture qualities. A lot of talk is going on about Pioneer plasma. Can somebody tell me, if it is really a good make and is durable? Tell me, if you please about Sony LCD also. I would not mind a 40" good one. In plasma, I can go upto 50 and above. Please share my concern.

Report offensive content

Kasperitis
30/01/2007 09:36 AM

I think and feel like my brain is scrambled after reading and studying this stuff for all week. Of tvs produced now Lcd appears to have the edge over all over plasma , important ! to go low refresh rate( low millesecond numbers below 15 , 5 is great. Projectors ,old technology on the way out. Palsma will try desperately to keep up but will inevitably loose out in few years to Lcd.s, lighter more rugged, user friendly , more reliable , continuing to improve in technology and price This war is going to be massive between the two i in next yr or so resulting in lower prices and a race for improvements .Lcd will win hans down.. In a year u will be able to buy a top line much improved 50 inch lcd for the price of a 42 inch today due to massive compitition and where production could be tripled. Massive plants in Asia are being built still not on line, this is only the beginning, Plasma will be left in the dust. then Lcd will be competing with the new Sed ( this year) etc etc, technologies. One can take the plunge, or wait forever till u push up daises or somewhere in between. To me personnally after a lot of thought and study next yr looks much better , a very marked drop in prices with a much improved more mass produced product with competition going no where but up @ up . Awar between LCD and PLasma mentioned earlier Plasma will lose . shrug ?? my old CRT works great so ahh for me probably next yr, probably around a 50 inch LCD . Sony (uses samsung parts and tech), Samsung ( no one ),Sharp a close second, Pioneer hmmm? seem to be leading the pack. Amen :-)))

Report offensive content

Barry the cable guy
01/02/2007 01:10 PM

Think about it. The real issue should be about how you shop for a t.v. or anything else. Look at the quality of the picture you are viewing. My opinion is that a 50 inch pioneer plasma looks the best compared to all other plasma brands with regular broadcasts and HD and digital tv without being 1080 maybe because of its video processing and upconverting electronics. The best LCD pictures for the price is the 52" 1080p Sharp or the Sony 52" with the upconverting video processing. Don't necessarily consider price too much because all these sets will be aroung for 60,000 hrs- the real costs divided by lifetime of the sets are less than the cable fees and the electricity costs. I am tempted by the LCD's because of the energy savings alone and the 1080p is the way of the future for blue ray and PS3. Broadcasting may be changed to 1080p as well because of the extensive underutilized fiber optic cable network that is waitng for a new utility. Many homes are only meters away from an existing line. Cable companies currently are connected to the optical network by a optical cable junction that limits bandwith to 720/1080i. This will be rectified by a straight optical connection to the home. So don't rule out cabe 1080p broadcasting for the forseeable lifetime of the set at reasonable costs. The cable guys are just chompen at the bit to connect users to the optical network- they are keen to break out their shovels

Report offensive content

Sam
02/02/2007 04:20 AM

My $.02 cents. I have a 42" lcd. My kids are Xbox 360 kids, so fear of burn in was big issue for me. However, at Bestbuy, when I look at the plasmas, I'm sorry to say, their colors look DULL and definitely not breath taking. Also, all of these TV's are dropping in price. That is, most are from $1000 to $2000 dollars. For me, this isn't too much money. If something really better comes along, then I might buy it. I will say buy the biggest TV you can for the room it will be in. I was using a 32" lcd. Going to a 42" LCD was absolutely incrediable. And one last point, I purchased the LCD a couple of weeks ago. I almost choose plasma due to size and price advantage. But, you always hear about plasmas deeper blacks. Well, is it me, but those deeper blacks means I can't see any detail into the picture. I mean it's black. Where as a LCD, you will actually see what's there. But again, buy what you like. It's not a major expense like a car or home purchase.

Report offensive content

Muni
04/02/2007 09:04 PM

So, i guess i have to wait for at least 2 years until the SED technology is available and fully tested. For now i will keep my 40" HDTV "Sony". I have to admit that i was little confused eading all the different comments, but thank you all for the input.

Report offensive content

TimTang
05/02/2007 03:21 AM

I just came across a Haier 32" in Thailand. It is about $400 US. I thought with all the hoop-lah going on this might be a good buy while the world tries to sort out what is better than what. I watched it side by side with other screens that are at least 3 times the price and couldn't tell the difference. Am I crazy? I think I'll buy it any way because my Sony is on the fritz and I need something. It says Made in Thailand and I've never heard of it before, but at that price, if it doesn't explode it will be worth it. Any one heard of this brand; I suspect it probably originates in China.

Report offensive content

goncalves
07/02/2007 12:31 AM

what are advantages and disadvantages of crt and lcd monitors?

Report offensive content

archer
11/02/2007 03:32 PM

You can read all you want about the advantages and disadvantages about lcds vs. plasma. Ultimately it comes down to personal preference. I have a 42" plasma and absolutely love it. The blacks are rich, the colour is vivd and the picture is so sharp it's nearly 3D. A close friend opted for a 32" lcd which is nice but I find not as sharp. Neither of us play video games so burn in isn't an issue. Keep in mind that when you get it home, you will have to adjust the levels to suit the lighting conditions of your room. In-store conditions aren't exactly perfect either. They often have HD feeds coming in and neglect to tell customers. Ask to see a SD feed before you buy and you'll see the real type of picture you're getting, if you don't have an HD terminal. And if it's an issue of life span, honestly, by the time a plasma dies, it's probably time to buy a new tv anyways.

Report offensive content

Derkdiggs
12/02/2007 12:25 PM

I was really wondering what to buy before I found this website. I now know what it will be PLASMA!! Thanks for all the input.

Report offensive content

stevenjet
13/02/2007 03:43 PM

Great help Thanks

Report offensive content

BIGGMIXX
14/02/2007 01:07 PM

I LOVE SIGHTS LIKE THIS, I AM IN THE MARKET FOR A NEW SET, AND NO ONE, BY NO ONE I MEAN SALES PEOPLE, ARE NEARLY AS HONEST AS ALL OF YOU CONSUMERS. THANK YOU FOR POSTING YOUR COMMENTS, I AM GOING WITH THE PLASMA OVER LCD. PICTURE QUALITY IS ABSOLUTELY PHENOMINAL, COMPARED TO MY 32 INCH, 975 LB GORILLA TV. THANKS AGAIN.

Report offensive content

Spunk
16/02/2007 08:58 AM

Plasma is the only way to go.. LCD's dont come close to produce a nice image. especially if u watch sports

Report offensive content

DOT
17/02/2007 11:33 AM

I THINK I'M MORED CONFUSED THAN EVER-LOL BUT THANKS SO MUCH FOR ALL OF YOUR OPIONIONS......AS NOW I AM MORENEDUCATED ABOUT ALL OF THEM AND NOW IT'S A MATTER OF WHERE I CAN GET THE BEST DEAL FOR THE MONEY. OUR TV IS ON IT'S WAY OUT AND IS SO HEAVY IT HASN'T BEEN MOVED FOREVER-I WAS CONVINCD TO GO BIG BUT NOW I THINK 40 IN. WILL BE MAX FOR BEST CLARITY. LEANING TOWARD LCD SIMPLY BECAUSE IT USES 30% LESS ELECTRIC AS THAT IS GOING UP ALL THE TIME!

Report offensive content

yippidee
18/02/2007 12:00 PM

I have a very large LG Plasma, was pretty happy with the picture and it's performance, until yesterday when it just flashed, and thick black smoke started coming out of the back of it, burning plastic smells and when I looked behind it there was flames inside the back of it !!! turned off the power and nearly choked on the acrid fumes. It is less than 3 years old and it only had a 12 month warranty. Load of rubbish. has anyone else heard of PLasmas, or LGS specifically spontaneously combusting ??

Report offensive content

shooter
18/02/2007 09:42 PM

i'm about to buy a 50 inch plasma . any tips on the best brand. i'm a sports nut thanks

Report offensive content

Joe
21/02/2007 05:32 AM

Sports nuts...Go plasma!..refresh factor! Game nuts...Go LCD!..no go for plasma! above 42in.......Go plasma!... Below 42in.....toss up! Plasma......Pioneer seems to be the premier brand these days. Samsung is also producing over a billions colors.

Report offensive content

andycob
21/02/2007 12:26 PM

Firstly thre is a bit of a mis understanding about refresh rates and response times. Firstly there is no set standard in response rates i can rate g/g but (what shade to what shade) and even then 8ms is only half the total movement (ie grass to footballer(G/G 8ms at best)it has to then go back from footballer to grass (another 8ms at best) regarless of all this overdrive and pixel stuff refresh rate means how many pictures per second. the faster that goes (ie pal is 50hz) then each crystal has to change 1:50 second otherwise the crystall will hold yup the next pciture the faster that is it pushes the crystal past its reponse time. the fact is you will always see motion blur on LCd because your eyes pick up on the changes of light as the crystal changes from one shade to anotehr and your eys work on light intensity - simply we see very sublte light changes (think of an army man he stays still so light doesnt change on him ie you cant see himevery easily its only the movemnt (and as light reflects /changes on his surface that you see him). Plasma on the other hand works at the speed of light (electricity) there is no mechanical crystal movemnt. Blacks are far superior in normal living room environemt for PLASMA - yes in store under over bright flueoros a LCD will look brighter and darker due to its overal brightness & the fact that plasma doesnt have a polarised filter which stops light (softer screen to check on LCD) When you put it in a darker environment the backlight passes through the filter and presents a grey screen and the plasma is a perfect black. Think of it this way: If i turn a torch on in the sunlight its not very bright as the overall environment sunlight overpowers the torch. if i take that torch in a softer (room) or night enviroenment then the small amount of light from the torch seems very very bright. the same goes for LCD, in a store no you cant see it as the store is too bright- but in you home YES you can the small amount of light is very bright creating poor blacks. A lot of people are also missing the point with overall colour displays. LCD at best can only produce 1024 (most are 256) gradation range (8 bit for computer minded people) compared to current plasma wich are over 3072 or even 4096 (65" panasonic Full HD one) What does that mean? well simply gradation is how many steps or shades of colours (Ie black to white and how many shades or steps in between) - the more shaded the more colours to pick from and the mroe natural the image or REAL it is. Plasma is far suprior in this regard which is why all the morning breakfast shows etc all run with plasma in their studios (ie Sunrise, channel 9 even big brother in the house had a LG plasma) we are talkign 16.7 million colurs -1.7billion compared to plasmas that have 29 billion to 4.3 trillion colours (viewable) = sunsets and even in gaming the sublte rendering from CGI graffics on cars or shadows in halls whenyou are shooting someone Burnin in is something that gets thrown around a lot but is very OVER exagerated, perhaps 5-10 years a go yes it was an issue. YES you can get a ghosting image ON BOTH displays; refer link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_persistence - FACT EVEN sony mention Quote " ghosting may occur if images are left for a long period of time this may disappear after some time " in the front of their users manuals under precautions. Yes you CAn get a ghosting on a plasma if you leave a Very bright static iamge on their FOR a period of time BUT IT WILL FADE - all that happpens is the pixels are charged up in comaprison ot the ones around them (normally have been off and black) so the ones that were charged up longer (ie dvd menu) have a slight glow from the phospher comapred to the surrounding ones. THIS IS NOT BURN IN but rather image retention and DOES DISappear - other wise woudlnt all those plasmas you see in store be left with both a Cricket score/ 9 logo and a football one? LCd gets a similar Image persis

Report offensive content

SLIMPICKER
21/02/2007 01:12 PM

PLAZMA 60 INCH LG IS THE WAY TO GO .

Report offensive content

james
24/02/2007 01:02 PM

Simple Question: I watch sports movies and play x box 360, looking about 42 inch, confused, what do i buy, lcd or plasma? and what brand? Salesmen change stories from store to store heeeeellllpppp!!!

Report offensive content

Paul
25/02/2007 12:26 PM

I need some help... I want to purchase a widescreen that I can move from a dark room for watching movies and playing games to an outdoor area with full light, is LCD or Plasma the best for different light conditions? Can anyone help me please.

Report offensive content

lalor
25/02/2007 09:06 PM

Surface-conduction Electron emitter Display SED what sort of radiation do they produce ? all cathode ray tubes are associated with a small amount of unwanted xrays You can think of the SCEs as millions miniature CRTs working together to create the image you see on an SED TV. I would want to know the xray and radiation emissions from a SED telivision I hope its to to much??

Report offensive content

anonymous
27/02/2007 03:11 PM

If you have looked at tv's for a few hours plasma looks nicer. Pioneer elite is the best picture of all. It just costs a lot.

Report offensive content

tony
28/02/2007 05:59 PM

I think that I`m more confused than ever! I need a few dyas rest to think it over. Good luck to all of you!

Report offensive content

anonymous
02/03/2007 12:40 PM

Nobody has paid any attention to the issue of how different models process video signals and create their picture. I have seen too many top brand LCD and Plasma with artifacts caused by the actual display (not mpeg artifacting caused by the compressed tv feed). Another big thing to watch out for is that most shops display their TVs all on component. Most cheap sets looks OK or even good on component, and amore so on DVI and HDMI, but fail miserably when compared to better sets when running composite (sure, you'd never run composite, but how many people do use it for VCRs, foxtel, etc). The cheaper brands and models almost always have very crude unintelligent design on their signal processing. As for screen burn in on plasmas, most dvd players have a screen saver, you'd have to try very hard to get burn in. Another fact overlooked is that LCDs have a matt screen, which is not protected with glass. Great for ambient or direct light not reflecting off the screen, bad for naughty kids, etc. Finally, plasma are rated with a HALF LIFE, they will be half as bright by the end of their half life. LCD continue to remain bright for the majority of the life of their backlights (which can be replaced).

Report offensive content

João Guerra
06/03/2007 12:46 AM

After it read the comments of this page, between others, would say that the following summary is correct: 1) Plasma - advisable for see TV with the television broadcast TV normal signal (sport and broadcast movies), being the best image here, even with worse definition, because the original signal does not have more then 720p; 2) LCD - better for games and PC connections and work, smaller consumption and bigger definition declared, with good results in Blue Ray and PS3 (that uses blue ray), having reflections less problems ; 3) LCD vs Plasma: LCD more expensive for identical dimensions, but with minor electric consume and lifetime more or less similar (perhaps better in LCD), by what the decision should be found between the parameters 1) and 2) above; 4) SED and Lazer - for those who can wait and see. 5) My personal decision? I need a new TV now and LCD is the winner (that because in see more DVD films then normal broadcast TV, i use PC often and my kid loves Play Station games). So, i change from a LG 50 Plasma (1366x768) to one Sony 40 LCD (1920x 1080 ), and i pay more..... perhaps in your case a Plasma could be the best choice!

Report offensive content

Bruce
07/03/2007 07:29 AM

Let me guess... those here who are warning us not to buy the new 1080 formats still are holding onto their Sony Betamax VCR players. No 1080 signals out there? There is! And when lots of people buy that technology in the form of tv’s, it forces the signal providers to upgrade as well. Movies, video games, cable, and satellite too! Has anyone given thought to the fact that larger screens result in larger pixels? Technically speaking, a 42 inch LCD, in order to display a 720 grade picture, must have pixels exactly twice the size of a screen that is 21 inches. All you would accomplish by getting the 42 inch would be that you can stand back further and see the same picture quality. The trick is going to more pixels! And faster refresh rates. And higher contrast ratios. And more colors. Somebody here said “So What” if it only lasts 4 or 5 years. By then they’ll have a model with a billion pixels and you may be stuck with one of those ancient 720 TV’s. Ewwwww. Buy the best technology and quality you can afford NOW.

Report offensive content

Larry Henderson
08/03/2007 04:09 PM

I am takaing my 2nd 50" Phllips Plasma back to the store for another exchange. I read all the articles because I don't know if I will stay with a Plasma or go with an LCD this time. I heard a good remark about the Sharp 52"on here and would like to know more if that same person could tell me about it. But fo this Phillips, I advise anybody not to buy a Phillips. They turn themselfs on and off at will, seems like it overheats I guess. Always at random, it will just shut completely down and in about 30 seconds or so restart itself. And the other issue is with the sound. It too at random will shut the sound completely off and it may be off for a couple of minutes or even for hours. Thank God I have a stereo hooked up to it to use when this happens. Anyway, I took the first set back that this happened to. And the second brand new set is doing the same thing. I called phillips and they sent me a USB. So when it arrived I plugged it in and it downoaded a new program. The sound on normal viewing was solved, but the set still turns itself on and off at will, and the sound problem now is in the inputs for VHS/DVD players. Watching a DVD, the sound will all of a sudden go our or you will hear all the sounds in the picture except for voices, just watch peoples mouth move and listen to the scenery. Any, click your input to regular TV and there will be sound, then click it back to the DVD playing and the sound will kick in from the switching being done. Whatever any of you people do, stay away from Phillips. There prices for a 50 inch has dropped from $3,000 down to $1,799. Or alittle less at places like COSTCO. But I think they put the big price drop on them because of their problems and not being able to fix it. Other than sound, the picture is fabulious in every way. I am trading this last Phillips back to COSTCO next week and I don't know if I should go with a LCD or stay with a Plamsa. The only sets that I can trade back for is a 50" panasonic or a 52" sharp LCD AQUOS. Could somebody tell me what I should go for? I am really confused by this LCD Plasma stuff and really just ticked off at Phillips. Never buy nothing frm them again. Somebody please give me some really solid suggestions and the reasoning why. Wife is fed up and tired of this switching too and I had to promise and do everything to her to get this big screen. HELP!!!!!!!!!!!

Report offensive content

Jakob
11/03/2007 11:28 AM

"amateur information. i hear the same things told to screen noobs by harvey norman workers. one glaring ridiculous statement: lcd's offer higher resolutions at bigger screen size. wrong. and even if they did what would be the point? the best images being broadcast at the moment are only utilising 720 vertical lines. which means that 1024x768 is the most you'll need. for a very long time. high def dvd's which aren't even being mass produced yet will use 720p or 1080i. so until a higher definition format comes along - i'm thinking 3-5 years (with the exception of content created at home with a super computer) - 1024x768 will be spot on for digital telivision and digital discs. and burn in on plasmas is still a huge issue. i've had burn in on fujitsu's latest high def plasma (not cheap at $7,000). burn in on a philips high def - $6k. burn in on lg's latest - $5.5k. the only screen i'm aware of that seems impervious to screen burn (purely personal experience) is the pioneer retail high def plasmas; 435hd, 505hd." although some of that mayb be correct. 1080 is 1920x1080 so if ur tv can only do 120x720 ur missing out. most tvs out now arnt "true" high def as they arnt 1920x1080 and setup for 720p. either way the picure is still good and alot of people may not even be able to see the diffrence.

Report offensive content

clralic
20/03/2007 04:22 AM

Don't LCD's have a tendency to popping pixels? Manufacturers will typically only cover one year warranty on a minimum of 5 pixels popping in a defined circle of viewing. Even one popping is irritating. What's everyone's view on this down-side to LCD's?

Report offensive content

Scorpio
20/03/2007 11:48 AM

I mean if you still have doubghts visit your local stores and check LCD & Plasma live . I am planning to buy LCD coz of better resoulution and i dont wanna risk burn-in effect.

Report offensive content

panda
25/03/2007 02:24 PM

i have read all the comments and still have no idea witch tv to get

Report offensive content

Alan
25/03/2007 11:23 PM

I live close to the ocean and my old TV's only last 2yrs or less before the electronic components rust. Is there a difference between plasma and LCD with regards to susceptibility to rust?

Report offensive content

unicijcle
29/03/2007 07:14 AM

Anybody anything to say on showing 4:3 material on a widescreen plasma? I would prefer buying a plasma for movies, but TV broadcast is only in 4:3 here where I live (Sao Paulo). I'm worried about burn-in obviously. My question is especially: are the various zoom/stretch options that are offered any good? Simply stretching 4:3 to 16:9 is not an acceptable option! As an alternative I have seen the Philips superzoom in action (fills up to 16:9 and stretches only on the sides) but that leaves a lot to desire in horizontal panning shots which are common obviously.

Report offensive content

Peter
30/03/2007 07:01 PM

Ok, real live story. :-) I have just bought me a 40” LCD TV. Why? Well, I did a pretty serious investigation regarding the picture quality. I did a couple of self made test pictures. One with Red, Green and Blue spanning from 0 – 255 per colour. One ranging from white (255, 255, 255) to full (255) Red, Green and Blue and down to black (0, 0, 0). And one monochrome with a range from white to black. I took my laptop and run those pictures on different screens. Plasma, LCD, TFT Lcd, CRT. Having done that there was no question about it. Plasma is your choice if you want the optimal colour and contrast performance. The LCD (at least the one I bought, Samsung 40R75) is not far behind though but there is a noticeable difference. This is if you have a plasma and a lcd standing beside each other or if you do a test like I did. When the TV is in you living room or ware ever you will not notice anything if you haven’t anything to compare with or you are some kind of expert. I’m VERY satisfied with my LCD and since I have a PC connected to it I don’t have to worry about burn ins or stuff. Best of all. It looks Awesome. Good luck to you all.

Report offensive content

kggirl
07/04/2007 07:51 AM

Short and sweet, two different days with two different salesmen, two different opinions. 42 Hitachi VS 46 Sharp LCD, Price not a factor. Absolutely wrecking my head from it all. I am about this close to renting a room in a cineplex and forgetting the whole world. Any educated info welcomed,,

Report offensive content

Danielle
10/04/2007 02:03 PM

Hi there, I have read alot of info and still dont know what is the best one for me. Can someone please help me? Does anyone have any suggestions about which TV would be the best option? It would mostly be used for watching digital tv and movies, sometimes to play games. I would like it to last at least 10 years. If anyone can email me at danielle_landow@hotmail.com and explain some key factors or share any advice that would be greatly appreciated. I have little knowledge about this and do not want to go and get pursuaded into buying a tv that is totally wrong for me just so some salesman can meet his weekly sales target.

Report offensive content

justme
15/04/2007 05:55 AM

well isn't this a room full of know it alls, lets just say that there are good and bad to both instead of fighting back and forth. Everyone will have there own preference depending on what you want and need and what you want to spend and honestly if its that important you are probabbly spending way to much time in front of the TV to begin with.

Report offensive content

Bernie
16/04/2007 02:01 PM

Buy something inexpensive with a good warranty. You get used to whatever quality is in front of you. Better still go outside for a walk. Say yes the next time one of the kids has a ball in their hands and wants to play with you. Go and clean up the table and do the washing up. Hang out the washing so your mum can start making your dinner. My 48cm CRT ensures i get the chores done and get some exercise....

Report offensive content

Bernie
16/04/2007 02:15 PM

Buy something inexpensive with a good warranty. You get used to whatever quality is in front of you. Better still go outside for a walk. Say yes the next time one of the kids has a ball in their hands and wants to play with you. Go and clean up the table and do the washing up. Hang out the washing so your mum can start making your dinner. My 48cm CRT ensures i get the chores done and get some exercise....

Report offensive content

bellsta
22/04/2007 11:20 PM

Good on ya Bernie. I still have thegood old tube. See the same footy game my mate sees on his Plasma only difference was his team lost. Hahahaha Dont forget find 30

Report offensive content

possum62
01/05/2007 08:57 PM

Thanks guys! Very informative posting! However, I think I'll stick to CRT for now, mostly because I cant afford neither LCD or Plasma. Problem is that my Sony CRT tv is practically on its death-bed, and I NEED to replace it with something! Preferably a good, clear, flat-screen CRT tv will do me just fine. Trouble is, no-one is making them anymore. The only "Brand" name CRT tv I could find was a Panasonic 68cm model. After that, you get brands such as Sansui and a bunch of other brands Ive never even heard of before? What should I do????

Report offensive content

Ken in Melbourne
02/05/2007 12:01 PM

One big advantage LCD has over Plasma, in the real world of watching television at home is, if you have any light behind the viewer, LCD does not create annoying reflections on the screen like Plasma. This is because of the glass surface on all Plasma screens.

Report offensive content

Joel
05/05/2007 03:39 AM

What is stupid about all of this is that I have a 27" Sharp TV that I got for free from a friend 10 years ago that still gets better standard television pictures than all of these $4000 televisions. Yes, High Def is beautiful. But, why can't we just figure this out already; sell the TVs for an arm and a leg and just be done with it. Why do I need to keep looking at so many TVs...NONE of which are "perfect"... I'm sticking with my free little TV. I can watch fast images, in full daylight, on an old DVD player, spilt paint all over the back, with just the 2" speakers in the front, and an old cable chord barely hanging on with duct tape, and it still looks better than this crap. I'm tired of the headache.

Report offensive content

ash
05/05/2007 07:35 AM

when was this posted? comments dates are before the actual post date!!

Report offensive content

smithy2008
05/05/2007 11:11 AM

ash, they updated the article. still a relatively useless XvsY if you ask me.. comments are interesting!

Report offensive content

gee2go
07/05/2007 12:50 AM

well i read most ov the comments n reckon plasma. seems like most things u pay for woy u get.

Report offensive content

tombledscoe
16/05/2007 01:43 PM

take along a movie and have salesperson hook up to favorite lcd and than plasma. watch a movie in dark scene or fast motion than tell me if lcd is even close. only an idiot will burn in a plasma today. is lcd even on the same planet sa plasma quality of picture not a chance that's the reason sony went with sxrd technology. lcd is only for games and is in reality a computer monitor nothing else. lcd what a joke. only a complete moron would belive some of the nonsense here about plasma. I sell both products and see them every day. would I buy an lcd so called tv? not a chance in the world!

Report offensive content

turbowned
18/05/2007 12:36 AM

Plasma is the answer, of course anything below 42inch would have to be lcd, are there plasmas below this size??? but it doesnt end there buying the right model plasma makes all the difference, Panasonic's extensive research into plasma technology has allowed them to build the best valued plasmas on the market, if price isnt at all a concern then you may consider a pioneer set = ) i picked my panasonic 42inch hi def panel for $1900 at good guys, $1000 less than the model with a built in tuner, also dont be shy to bargain down the salesmen, go good guys or jb, you can usually get them to slash alot off the store price = )

Report offensive content

scsulli
20/05/2007 12:56 AM

Now completely confused, think I'll buy a book instead.

Report offensive content

Craig
20/05/2007 01:26 PM

Tossing up between 50 inch LG 50PC1D and the Pioneer PDP-507XDA. Both plasma. Have Yamaha SRS and Subwoofer. Any info on choice of the two would be great.

Report offensive content

geoff
22/05/2007 06:21 AM

It continues to amaze me how if a statement is repeated often enough it becomes a fact. For instance quite a while back the Consumer Magazine here in New Zealand ran a test on both Plasma and LCD's and they found that LCD's in fact used more power than Plasma's and that in everyday use the 'slow'response time of LCD's wasn't evident. It's a bit like when Cd's first hit the market. We were told they were almost indestructable and the quality was superior to analogue. Now I see analogue is making a come back.

Report offensive content

geoff
22/05/2007 06:23 AM

It continues to amaze me how if a statement is repeated often enough it becomes a fact. For instance quite a while back the Consumer Magazine here in New Zealand ran a test on both Plasma and LCD's and they found that LCD's in fact used more power than Plasma's and that in everyday use the 'slow'response time of LCD's wasn't evident. It's a bit like when Cd's first hit the market. We were told they were almost indestructable and the quality was superior to analogue. Now I see analogue is making a come back.

Report offensive content

tombledscoe
23/05/2007 08:21 AM

CRAIG you picked the right technology pioneer by far has better colors and a much better processor, so when watching no hd content it will look much better a little more money but worth the investment.

Report offensive content

bill
25/05/2007 09:16 AM

your wrong lcds have horrible blacks. or greys should we call them. and "none" 1024x768" isnt even a 16:9 res. oh and sky europe broadcasts broadcasts 1920x1080 interlaced, where do you think uploaders cap from.

Report offensive content

Ian
02/06/2007 10:14 PM

HEHE This is all too funny. All this over T.V's. People seriously need to get a life. If i can see the picture in happy. Who needs to spend 10'000 to watch a movie anyway. And if u have that amount of money to throw away in the first place it doesn't matter if it breaks because you can just go and replace it. GET LIVES GUYS!!!! No offence!

Report offensive content

stefanlooksandplaystenniswell
09/06/2007 11:05 PM

ya well im not really sure caseu we just bought a 81 cm lcd tv, and the picture isnt to godd and im very unhappy, oh well! ill just buy a plasma next time

Report offensive content

Jam
11/06/2007 04:40 PM

To TimTam Haier is a Chinese Brand. I used to have an ricecooker made by them. Good one. For that price, I would not think too much. It may last for 2 years. And in 2 years, many things will change and by that time, I may end up with top-end 60" Plasma or LCD for $500.

Report offensive content

Jam
11/06/2007 04:41 PM

To TimTam Haier is a Chinese Brand. I used to have an ricecooker made by them. Good one. For that price, I would not think too much. It may last for 2 years. And in 2 years, many things will change and by that time, I may end up with top-end 60" Plasma or LCD for $500.

Report offensive content

Jam
11/06/2007 05:29 PM

I am a Sony fan since long time. Almost got everything from them walkman, digital camera, music player, CRT TV... Bought a Vaio laptop last year. Got some dead pixels. Very visible. Sony refused to replace/repair the screen because those number of dead pixels "are under Sony standard policy". So angry as bought Sony for its reputation for "perfection" (Vaio is more expensive than similar model HP, Acer, Toshiba, Fijitsu...). Luckily the store I bought the laptop from agreed to help me dealing with that thing and finally for the screen replaced by Sony. So be aware, 'you have what you pay for" is not always true. Since then, I am very alert with Sony product and quality standard policy (which can be crap sometimes). In a market for some time, looking to buy a new large TV. Love Plasma for picture quality and price. Intended to buy 50" Plasma last year but it was still pricey ($3990 for the one I wanted, a Philips I think). Now a similar unit of Panasonic is for sale for $2999 at HN or the Good Guys. May wait a little bit more until the price drops to $2000 (may be in next few months, or weeks?). With $2000, will be happy for few years (let say 4-5 years). Then it's time to change to something new, cute and make me excited again. Fed up with my old CRT TV (bought less than 4 years ago. It still working manificiently, beautibul colors but need something new and more motivated). Guys, do not spend too much on something that changes too fast unless money is not your issue. A (good, branded) TV that costs $5,000 will not make huge different with a $3,000 similar size TV unit unless you attach the price tag to it all the time to impress your guests and friends. In the shops, they do look different from each other but most of good brand TVs will be fine in your own home, under your own eyes. Do not use a telescope when watching TV, you will be happy. Who will watch your TV most of the time? You and your kids or your friends? So do not rely too much on their comments. Come to the shop, bring the kids with you (if they are not too annoying), which one is good at your eyes and fits your pocket, buy it. The most important thing is you and the whole family happy. My wife will definitely be yelling at me weeks or months later if I buy a $7,000 top-end LCD TV instead of a $2,000 Plasma as we can use the difference (money) for some thing else (buying new shares or upgrading to a new 2007 Odyssey...). Finally, if a 50" LCD has 4ms respond time, 1080, built-in turner and comes from good brand AND comes as same price as the similar plasma, I will go for it. In the mean time, I do not want to wait (for prices to drop) and miss wonderful moments of watching TV and DVD with my kids, I will be happy with a Plasma and in next few years, I may replace that Plasma with a new LCD or laser or whatever available in the market. Our lives are not too long for waiting. Enjoy life but do not live on heavy debts. Pioneer sounds good because all its plasma come with Pioneer’s 5 years warranty (no extra charge). If you can have 2 more years of extended warranty (7 years in total), you will be absolutely fine. Pioneer plasmas are more expensive than Panasonic. That is, however, an issue of consideration to me.

Report offensive content

Jam
11/06/2007 05:29 PM

I am a Sony fan since long time. Almost got everything from them walkman, digital camera, music player, CRT TV... Bought a Vaio laptop last year. Got some dead pixels. Very visible. Sony refused to replace/repair the screen because those number of dead pixels "are under Sony standard policy". So angry as bought Sony for its reputation for "perfection" (Vaio is more expensive than similar model HP, Acer, Toshiba, Fijitsu...). Luckily the store I bought the laptop from agreed to help me dealing with that thing and finally for the screen replaced by Sony. So be aware, 'you have what you pay for" is not always true. Since then, I am very alert with Sony product and quality standard policy (which can be crap sometimes). In a market for some time, looking to buy a new large TV. Love Plasma for picture quality and price. Intended to buy 50" Plasma last year but it was still pricey ($3990 for the one I wanted, a Philips I think). Now a similar unit of Panasonic is for sale for $2999 at HN or the Good Guys. May wait a little bit more until the price drops to $2000 (may be in next few months, or weeks?). With $2000, will be happy for few years (let say 4-5 years). Then it's time to change to something new, cute and make me excited again. Fed up with my old CRT TV (bought less than 4 years ago. It still working manificiently, beautibul colors but need something new and more motivated). Guys, do not spend too much on something that changes too fast unless money is not your issue. A (good, branded) TV that costs $5,000 will not make huge different with a $3,000 similar size TV unit unless you attach the price tag to it all the time to impress your guests and friends. In the shops, they do look different from each other but most of good brand TVs will be fine in your own home, under your own eyes. Do not use a telescope when watching TV, you will be happy. Who will watch your TV most of the time? You and your kids or your friends? So do not rely too much on their comments. Come to the shop, bring the kids with you (if they are not too annoying), which one is good at your eyes and fits your pocket, buy it. The most important thing is you and the whole family happy. My wife will definitely be yelling at me weeks or months later if I buy a $7,000 top-end LCD TV instead of a $2,000 Plasma as we can use the difference (money) for some thing else (buying new shares or upgrading to a new 2007 Odyssey...). Finally, if a 50" LCD has 4ms respond time, 1080, built-in turner and comes from good brand AND comes as same price as the similar plasma, I will go for it. In the mean time, I do not want to wait (for prices to drop) and miss wonderful moments of watching TV and DVD with my kids, I will be happy with a Plasma and in next few years, I may replace that Plasma with a new LCD or laser or whatever available in the market. Our lives are not too long for waiting. Enjoy life but do not live on heavy debts. Pioneer sounds good because all its plasma come with Pioneer’s 5 years warranty (no extra charge). If you can have 2 more years of extended warranty (7 years in total), you will be absolutely fine. Pioneer plasmas are more expensive than Panasonic. That is, however, an issue of consideration to me.

Report offensive content

Jam
15/06/2007 11:20 PM

Hi again, I've seen a Panasonic 50", looks like the P600A. Did not like it for one simple reason: the screen is flickering. Too bad for me, made my eyes hurt. Was told that LCD does not have the same problem. Confused now.

Report offensive content