Home audio & video: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick?
- 5/1/08 2:27 AM
Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick?
by Lee Koo (ADMIN) - 5/1/08 2:27 AM
If you had only one HDTV choice, which technology would you pick?
-- Plasma (Please explain why.)
-- LCD (Please explain why.)
LCD for me.
by 8IronBob - 5/1/08 6:29 AM In reply to: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I'd still give LCD a chance, especially a Samsung or a Sony, since they deliver probably the best picture qualities, and they are better with gaming, which I do a lot of, and are equally good in that you don't have to worry about burn-in, or suffering from brightness issues over time. Plus LCD prices in the larger sizes are narrowing to those of the plasma counterparts. For example, I did see the Samsung 46A650 in the stores, of which Cnet just gave the 52" an Editor's Choice Award. Comparing that to a Pioneer Kuro, it seemed like Samsung was equally as impressive as a Pioneer, which surprised the wazoo out of me. So, yeah, LCD is still a strong going format, and may continue to be impressive throughout the days to come.
Plasma
by bevillan - 5/1/08 6:37 AM In reply to: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
The one past drawback to plasmas is that they have screen burn-in risk. Well if you buy either Panasonic or Pioneer nowadays, they have virtually eliminated that same risk. Plasma has the best blacks, best viewing angle, and is slightly cheaper in the larger sized displays than LCD.
Also, LCD still has dead pixel risk. I, for one, would be driven crazy by a small accumulating number of dead pixels on my expensive display as I waited for the portion to reach a certain level before the manufacturer would even service it.
YOU CAN BASICALLY DROP "BURN-IN" AS A PROBLEM...............
by Riverledge - 5/24/08 8:04 PM In reply to: Plasma by bevillanI BOUGHT A 58" PANASONIC PLASMA; MY BIGGEST GRIPE IS THE POWER
CONSUMPTION. YOU NEVER GET SOMETHING FOR NOTHING MY DAD ALWAYS SAID.
NOW THAT PIONEER HAS COMMISSIONED PANASONIC TO MANUFACTURE ITS "KURO"
SCREENS; THE CHOICE SHOULD BE OBVISIOUS. PANASONIC!!!
Best wishes,
River.
A PANASONIC TH-58PZ850.
by Riverledge - 5/30/08 1:00 PM In reply to: Plasma by bevillanFinis.
Where do you find one?
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] - 5/30/08 8:07 PM
In reply to: A PANASONIC TH-58PZ850. by Riverledge
I want the 58...800U, and Panasonic just says "sometime this summer!" 
-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
Plasma
by JohnMarat - 5/1/08 7:05 AM In reply to: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I'm currently in the market for a new flat panel. After much research and visiting BB or CC. I've come to the conclusion that Plasma is the way to go and here's why.
First, No motion blur. The motion blur on LCD's is so hard to watch. I watch a lot of sports and the LCD just can't handle the motion like plasma.
Second, Plasma has realistic colors and brightness. Whenever you go into BB or CC you'll notice how pretty and bright the LCD's are compared to the plasma's(like moths drawn to the light). This to me is unrealistic. While the picture LCD's give off is pretty and bright this isn't enough justification.
Third, The viewing angles on LCD are horrible. Everyone can't sit right in front of the TV.
Fourth, The black levels are insane on plasma. If you like that washed out greyish blacks of LCD's go for it.
With the only real negative plasma has for it is Burn-In and Image Retention. After much research this almost never occurs anymore if it does its fixable.
I do agree with LCD black levels, but they are better...
by 8IronBob - 5/1/08 7:28 AM In reply to: Plasma by JohnMaratHave you seen the Samsung A650? I believe you'd agree that's the best LCD on the market, period. I noticed it first hand, and I compared it to a Pioneer Kuro. The blacks actually looked darker on the Samsung, and that 120Hz Auto-Motion Plus was indeed the cat's pajamas as far as reducing motion blur. So, the gap in plasma and LCD performance is indeed narrowing, imo, and that's the reason why.
I'll take:
by gretzkyv99 - 5/1/08 7:54 AM In reply to: I do agree with LCD black levels, but they are better... by 8IronBobPlasma
60 Pioneer Elite (Cmon its a Pioneer 
I agree the A650 Lcd's are gorgeous but if I want a shiny screen, I'll take a Pioneer.
Until everything is broadcast in 1080p I'll chose plasmas anyday. Imo plasmas look better in SD, and lastly most large Lcd's (52+) look bad to me, but that 65Se Sharp looks pretty sweet.
I agree ........
by doccoffin - 5/1/08 10:27 AM In reply to: I'll take: by gretzkyv99Pioneer`s KURO line have the best picture I`ve ever seen.
Life expectancy
by llittlepage - 5/1/08 4:49 PM In reply to: Plasma by JohnMaratI don't know if this is still an issue (or ever was for that matter), but I heard the life expectancy of a plasma could be 4 - 6 years. To me, that's rather short for something in the 4 digit price range. I don't own either so I can't speak from experience. Any thoughts?
LCD Vs. Plasma
by osolumbr - 5/1/08 9:28 PM In reply to: Plasma by JohnMaratI've been researching for the best 50'' HDTV flat panel. After what i have considered over plasma and LCD, I have gone with LCD. You may ask why...
My opinion on the picture quality of an LCD screen has really no comparison.. I do agree that plasma has a slightly better picture although you would have to place 2 tvs side by side to see a difference. Plus, Plasma screen tvs use more energy, cost more and are heavier (i tend to place my tv on my wall). The TV that i have now is a 50'' 1080P LCD Sony Bravia which cost around 2 grand compared to a Plasma of the same size which costed about $2700-3200 average. Far best picture that I have seen from an LCD screen. The only downfall is the viewing angles which is not a problem in our living space. Basically you would have to look at the tv at an extreme angle to notice it.I play my Playstation 3 and watch Blu-Ray disks without motion blur in 1080p mode. Motion blur occurs on this tv mostly in 1080i, which again is minimal.
No doubt that a plasma has a better picture. But really, you cant notice it unless you place 2 tvs side-by-side and study them for an hour. Really folks, if you want THAT MUCH BETTER picture and spend an extra 1000 bucks than thats just great.
Stick with the Plasma
by OccamMD - 5/1/08 10:21 AM In reply to: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I have a Pioneer Kuro 50" 1080p and couldn't be happier. The blacks are excellent and blu-ray looks far better to me than on my HD LCD. I was afraid of plasma in the past, but burn-in seems to be a minimal issue for normal use now and the lifespans are quite good. They definitely both have their place, but the picture of the plasma definitely wins hands down. And, the plasma can runs 1080p 24Hz @ 72Hz where my LCD is stuck @ 60Hz. Granted some are up to 120HZ, which works this out, but the plasma is quite crisp and quick.
LCD TV, Quality is only part of the issue
by Bruce Burns - 5/1/08 10:23 AM In reply to: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
As you mentioned plasma takes more power there for adds to global warming even if indirectly.
We must take responcability for our carbon footprint and that begins in the home.
Do not let your senses dictate your priorities. Use your head and be responcable for your excessive energy usage.
Bruce
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
