Community weekly poll: Which TV technology would you pick?
- 12/13/06 3:54 PM
Which TV technology would you pick?
by Marc Bennett - 12/13/06 3:54 PM
If cost was not a factor, which TV technology would you pick and why?
CRT (picture tube) (tell us why)
DLP (tell us why)
HD-ILA (tell us why)
LCD (tell us why)
LCD projection (tell us why)
LCoS (tell us why)
Overhead projector (tell us why)
Plasma (tell us why)
Rear-projection (tell us why)
Other (what is it?)
Plasma's and CRT's
by jprkenny - 12/14/06 3:00 AM In reply to: Which TV technology would you pick? by Marc Bennett
Plasma screens give pretty good quality for their size, and don't cost too expensive, unfortunately we fell for it and bought one that isn't high definition, and we can tell that because of our high def set top box that is on a high def channel doesn't sound that great of high def yet on standard it does.
CRT TV gives always the best quality picture you can ever find and no plasma or set top or rear projections or whatever TV out there. I personally have a 21 inch CRT TV in my bedroom and I am extremely impressed with the quality it shows even though it was cheap.
reply to stevent1992 - 12/14/06 3:00 AM
by kmsmith54 - 12/15/06 10:32 AM In reply to: Plasma's and CRT's by jprkennyI agree that a crt -or rear projection is still a better picture but that would not affect your sound. Different signal. My brother bot a new lcd and it took more than a little work to get all the signal inputs to work right on his little system.
All the digital systems use compression to allow them to send a large signal over the limited bandwidth. You can not put in the picture what is not there. So when the compression program picks one instance as the to save and throws out the very similar-but not really the same information it can not recreate the same image on your screen. What was not saved, to me is the character of the image. What makes real life, real. The nuances that that make something what it is. Digital compression makes a startlingly beautiful picture. But it is not real. It is so good because the program has save one blue and created an image with the blue looking much deeper and more solid, which looks great. But that is not the real world.
But seems we will have no option soon so I am just getting used to it.
kevin
I've always seem to like that which did not survive.
Sharp expert pad, HP Omnibook 300, Palm Zire 72, Sony Beta and Super Beta.
Expensive little toys that ended up dead ends. This time I'll wait awhile.
Plasma or LCD
by Buckwilder - 12/14/06 1:29 PM In reply to: Which TV technology would you pick? by Marc Bennett
I agree that a direct view CRT is still the best overall image available. Major detractor is their weight however...I have a 32" 4:3 Sony Hi-Scan 1080i T.V, bought it 5 years ago and I am still very impressed by its picture for all sources hi-def. However, Plasma and LCD are rivaling CRT displays now, and their depth and weight make them an attractive option for virtually any living space. If I had to pick one regardless of price, I think I would go LCD, I will however wait until:
1) they can producr better deeper black levels
2) they can fully resolve every detail of a 1080p signal
3) they have a response rate of better than 4ms
LCD
by Zenkai76 - 12/15/06 4:29 AM In reply to: Which TV technology would you pick? by Marc Bennett
I prefer LCD because 1080p is great picture quality with a HD cable box and blue ray DVD. Even though I know they are suppose to be better at preventing it, the reason I wouldn't do plasma is because of potential of image burn ins, especially if you like to play games.
SED
by balcanon - 12/15/06 4:48 AM In reply to: LCD by Zenkai76I know that this has been delayed, but if you have seen SED technology, which will be available within a year in sizes of 50" and up, you would agree that no other technology is as good. SED uses an array of the equivalent of thousands of transmitters arranged on the surface of the viewing area, sort of like a single DLP chip that doesn't use projection to form an image. This gives the screen very high resolution and clarity without any thickness. So a clear, high resolution image without burn in or shorter lifespan concerns in a flat panel is the result. The image quality is beter than anything I have seen. Better than plasma with higher contrast and brightmess and no ghosting or motion breakup like an LCD. It was the hit of the Consumer Electronics show last year, but delays in manufacturing has prevented it's release. It should be available to consumers through Toshiba in 2007.
SED will be best if it is ever made available
by duxlerwm - 12/15/06 8:41 AM In reply to: SED by balcanonSED is my choice because of what it has in common with CRT technology. There seems to be general agreement that today the best picture quality is provided by CRT monitors. There is almost no latency and contrast ratio is the highest it can be. That is because the picture is produced by accelerated electrons hitting a phosphor screen. The drawback of current CRT monitors is their large size and weight. Some consider convergence an issue, but that is not a problem with modern CRT monitors.
The promise of SED comes from the fact that it combines the best of LCD and CRT monitors. An SED monitor will be as thin as an LCD one. Electrons are produced by a solid state process --- no filaments or other "tube" components. The electrons are than accelerated across a narrow gap until they cause phosphorescence after hitting a phosphor surface. That means they have all of the desirable characteristics of both LCD and CRT monitors without the undesirable characteristics of either.
Sounds too good to be true? Maybe. SED is under development by Canon and Toshiba. It was supposed to be out a year ago. Will it ever be released? We'll see.
on the market NOW
by bumperman - 12/15/06 4:36 PM In reply to: SED will be best if it is ever made available by duxlerwmHey guys & gals.....
How about we just discuss the technology that is ON THE MARKET NOW???? I think that is a good starting & ending point, for now, anyway.
sounds like your SED is like Sony's Lycos SXRD, which I have, and is the best HDTV of any kind I could find.
1080p
incredible pic
ASTC Tuner
Dish Network, true 1080 native res. (40+ full time Hi-Def channels...)
AWESOME.
Why buy a TV that is over priced and not the best.
by B5Ranger - 12/17/06 6:02 PM In reply to: on the market NOW by bumpermanIt is simple TVs like the SEDs, FEDs, and NEDs are going to be hands down a vastly better picture and last longer and cheaper! Why not wait one to two years to buy a TV that is hands down a better set and get 60" for under $900? I had a TV near death and 25 years old with 420 line resolution. So got a slim CRT Tube set that is doing just fine at 34" for $650 and name brand. But the rest of the TVs will have to wait till the new twice as good dirt cheap flat screen TVs come out.
Plasma vs LCD
by Themisive - 12/15/06 5:24 AM In reply to: Which TV technology would you pick? by Marc Bennett
CRT is not really a factor here, however, it is not noted that Plasma screens are more power-hungry than are LCD screens, thus assuming that I did want a flat panel screen (which I will in the not too distant future), it will be an LCD HDTV.
Another factor that was not made clear abvout Plasma screens is the heat they produce.
In addition, I also note that though the answer was intended for recipients in the US only, I recieve PAL broadcasts, so please Barry W. of North Canton, Ohio, do get your facts correct, and remember we do not all use dollars and cents either.
I'd choose OLED if it were available
by keaura - 12/15/06 6:03 AM In reply to: Which TV technology would you pick? by Marc Bennett
OLED - Organic Light Emitting Diodes are the next generation of display technology. Pioneered by Kodak, OLEDs require far less power than LCD or plasma, and because they are self-lighting, do not require a backlight. Displays of OLED can be manufactured at virtually any size (a real wall display) and on a flexible substrate.
I can't wait for this technology to hit the marketplace.
SED or OLED
by Dr. Planarian - 12/15/06 6:07 AM In reply to: Which TV technology would you pick? by Marc Bennett
As I understand it, the upcoming SED technology will provide all the advantages of a CRT set (negligible latency, optimal brightness, spectacular contrast) in a flat panel, 1080p package.
But then there's OLED, which I understand may be introduced in televisions in late 2007 or early 2008. It's already used for camera rear-panel viewfinders. After the manufacturers can get the screen widths up to what people will be demanding (70" will likely be the most common width in the new era; OLED TVs will start out very small but, like LCD's, eventually catch up to the others), this is likely to become the "last" format because of its many clear advantages over any other technology.
OLEDs will feature virtually zero latency, brightness that cannot be matched because you're viewing the direct light emitters, outrageous longevity, very low power consumption and, best of all, truly FLAT screens, as flat as a paper wall poster, that can be folded or rolled up into tubes. They can be designed like the movie screens we had in our elementary school classroom, retractable into a tube and you would roll them down like a window blind when you want to use them.
I want one of THOSE!
LCOS
by timhall - 12/15/06 6:53 AM In reply to: Which TV technology would you pick? by Marc Bennett
I love the look of LCOS, and since crt's are not practical in large format this is the best alternative. The color is rich and luminance has good range similar to Plasma and DLP. When you consider the LCOS having all three colors on the panel opposed to low cost DLP projectors using a single chip and a color wheel the advantage goes to LCOS. A three chip DLP might be better but the price point is cost prohibitive. The only unknown is will the LCOS image yellow over time like an LCD.
There is still a lamp to fail in some uncertain number of hours and costing at least 250.00 it is a negative for the LCOS
Plasmas Offer Best Picture Quality
by replica - 12/15/06 6:54 AM In reply to: Which TV technology would you pick? by Marc Bennett
Aside from CRTs which are smaller and bulkier, plasma TV's offer the best picture quality. Some of the advantages of plasma over LCD are better contrast ratios, deeper blacks and more realistic colors. The only picture advantage LCD has is that there are more 1080p sets available, which should even out in coming years. I feel picture quality is the by far the most important aspect of a TV and Plasma wins hands down vs LCD and any rear projection.
Since Money is No Object....
by joeyso - 12/15/06 7:39 AM In reply to: Plasmas Offer Best Picture Quality by replicaWouldn't you think that the highest quality front projector (homoe theater or otherwise) would provide the best picture? The best projectors would provide higher contrast and much more brightness than any plasma currently produced, especially in a comparable size. If I had a choice and someone else's pocket book I would get the wall melter flagship from Runco ($250K).
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
