Re: OT: Plasma or LCD TV?

Most of the "facts" that have already been advanced with regards to life time,
burn-in, and such are outdated. You'll get better answers on the Audio/Visual
Science Forums (www.avsforum.com); there's a section there dedicated to flat
panel display technology, and another for front- and rear-projection
technology.

The ED set will likely do a better job on standard definition programming than
an HD set. A lot depends on the quality of the internal scaler (if used) or
the external cable box. Most cable boxes don't do that great a job with
standard def, although the Motorola 6412 phase III seems to have improvements
in that area.

Plasma display lifetimes are now comparable to cathode ray tubes; burn-in is
hardly an issue with newer display technology.

Off-axis viewing on LCD and DLP is poor compared to plasma; LCD suffers mostly
for vertical axis displacement, while DLP has a narrow "sweet spot" that is
pretty much directly in line with the display. Sit off to the side and that
DLP picture looks poor.

Response time can be a problem with LCD displays; fast motion can appear
blurry or leave trails, so action sports may not look as good on LCD.

LCD can look "artificial" to some eyes. Some folks can see "screen door
effect" on plasmas. Some folks can see rainbows on DLP sets.

LCD and DLP can produce higher levels of brightness than plasma. Plasma can
produce deeper blacks than LCD or DLP, almost approaching CRT black levels.
If you're in a high ambient light environment (lots of windows) plasma
displays may not be bright enough for your liking. If you like to watch
movies in subdued lighting there is absolutely nothing (other than CRT) that
can touch the black level of Panasonic plasma displays.

LCD is more expensive than plasma, while DLP is cheapest. Don't forget to
factor in the cost of replacement bulbs for projection displays; over time the
final cost will approach that of LCD or plasma.

I have both plasma and LCD, and each excels for different uses.

Joseph "Tony" Dziedzic

In article <1133474288.011748.18700@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "G"
<gjasek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>I'm sure others have gone through the exercise. I'm looking for
>opinions from people who have made recent purchases. If price and size
>were about the same would you buy an Enhanced Definition Plasma TV (42
>inch) or a HDTV LCD (37 inch)? Thanks.
>
.

Relevant Pages

  • Holiday HDTV Buying Guide!
    ... A plasma with lusciously rich black levels? ... This year witnessed the introduction of 42-inch and larger plasma televisions that offer native 1080p resolution, matching the maximum resolution of their LCD counterparts. ... By contrast, when such content is converted for a traditional 60-Hz display, it appears in an uneven 3:2 frame cadence. ... Perhaps the most exciting thing about rear-projection televisions (RPTVs) is that they provide big-screen HDTV enjoyment at a fraction of the price of similar-size flat-panel displays. ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: LCD or Plasma or DLP - Opinions please.
    ... >> LCD = crappier picture than Plasma ... > expensive than DLP, it uses more energy than the other ... > rainbowing effect worse - especially for white or bright colors. ...
    (alt.games.video.xbox)
  • Re: LCD or Plasma or DLP - Opinions please.
    ... > LCD = crappier picture than Plasma ... expensive than DLP, it uses more energy than the other 2, ... DLP has the rainbowing effect but not every one notices this. ...
    (alt.games.video.xbox)
  • Re: Plasma, LCD, DLP which way to go
    ... Lcd and dlp rear projection are going to both ... Plasma has the added drawback of image burnin like ... with the best picture have to go to lcd and lcos. ... color wheel so the limiting item is the bearing. ...
    (alt.tv.tech.hdtv)
  • Re: LG to close PDP plant
    ... And the display technology that I remember written about then was CRT but ... All this to minimize depth of the display device. ... working on plasma devices during WWII. ... LCD is taking over the 40" market from PDP. ...
    (alt.tv.tech.hdtv)