Choosing a TV type

[mhooper1125]

Ok am looking for a screen for primarly video game use.

Distance can be anything as far as viewing since it wil be setup with the ability to move the origination point of viewing.

Since it will be used primarly from a computer the first question would be:

What to choose, Front projection, Plasma, or LCD?

It needs to be able to keep up with very high FPS.

[mhooper1125]

And by FPS is Frames per second.

not first person shooter.

I apologize for any confusion.

[Phil Taylor]

I'd say get a 1080p DLP or LCoS/SXRD front projector. Go BIG :D Since you are playing a lot of games - a plasma could possibly get burn in from counters and such depending on the brand and model - although burn-in has been all but eliminated from the best plasmas.

[Panjsheri]

I would say go with and LCD as they are on average now 4 ms. I have been playing some really awesome games on my TV and never had any issues especially with the FPS (Frames per second). Plasma will have no slowdown issue but there is the chance of burn in and the pixels are bigger so not as crisp as an LCD. The projectors are the biggest with the best bang for buck but they are best if you sit directly infront of them and not on an angle. Also they arent as bright as a lot of mid range LCD's so again get an LCD prices are a lot better now anyways:D

[annunaki]

I would say go with and LCD as they are on average now 4 ms. I have been playing some really awesome games on my TV and never had any issues especially with the FPS (Frames per second). Plasma will have no slowdown issue but there is the chance of burn in and the pixels are bigger so not as crisp as an LCD. The projectors are the biggest with the best bang for buck but they are best if you sit directly infront of them and not on an angle. Also they arent as bright as a lot of mid range LCD's so again get an LCD prices are a lot better now anyways:D

LCD still has motion blur even at 4ms response times. Especially when it is side by side with a plasma.

The burn in issue with plasmas (Pioneer & Panasonic) specifically is really a moot point. I have said it many times, but you would have to intentionally burn the set in. (i.e. vivid/dynamic mode with most settings at or near maximum) I have seen a Panasonic TH-50px75U in vivid mode with a still image (Spiderman II dvd menu) for more than 6 hours that had no permanent effect on the set. There was image retention for about 20 minutes but it was completely gone thereafter.

I would not say that LCD's are more crisp. They sometimes appear sharper with a static image, but when there's motion it all changes.

[jliedeka]

I bought an LCD because I was worried about burn-in. If I had to do it over, I'd go plasma. LCDs actually lose resolution when there is a lot of motion. I don't really notice it myself but I probably would if I were used to plasma.

Another consideration is your environment. If it's hard to control the light levels in your room, a projector probably isn't what you want. Also, in general, LCDs are less susceptible to a bright environment. Some plasmas have anti-glare screens, though. If you are able to block out daylight, then a projector may be a good choice. You can certainly get a bigger picture for less money.

Jim

[zumbo]

Neighbor has had a Samsung 720p plasma for about a year. It's decent.

I have had a Toshiba 1080p LCD for 10 months. It's dead. At shop.:o

My brother has had a Samsung 1080p DLP for about four years. Fantastic TV.

The only reason I didn't go DLP is because I needed a 42". If you can go larger than 42", I would say DLP.

Don't know about LCoS/SXRD.

[StiMpACk]

if your main use of the tv will be games and hooking it up to the computer, you probably wanna go with lcd. no worry of burn in like you would with some plasmas, and you dont have to change a lightbulb every 2-6 years for a projection. if you like to turn your games on and off, thats really bad for dlp considering you should leave the tv on for a while before you turn it off to conserve the bulb.

i suggest a samsung with 120 htz, 4ms makes it pretty quick, great picture, and they usually have swivel, so you can change your viewing angle with ease

[Biggiesized]

I'd go with a DLP.

[bandphan]

with the price of the panny plasmas so competitive, its hard to understand why plasma wouldnt be the clear choice with top quality pq and value.

[annunaki]

if your main use of the tv will be games and hooking it up to the computer, you probably wanna go with lcd. no worry of burn in like you would with some plasmas, and you dont have to change a lightbulb every 2-6 years for a projection. if you like to turn your games on and off, thats really bad for dlp considering you should leave the tv on for a while before you turn it off to conserve the bulb.

i suggest a samsung with 120 htz, 4ms makes it pretty quick, great picture, and they usually have swivel, so you can change your viewing angle with ease

I am not sure if you read my post above, but I would give it another look. :)

In my opinion 120hz is a complete gimmick feature in most applications. Especially so if one wants to see the media as intended.

While I will agree that the Samsung LCD's seem to perform the best (750 Series on up), plasma represents such a better value. One must purchase the 750 series LCD's just to come close to equaling (not surpassing) what the 720p Panasonic plasmas already do very well (Black levels, motion, color accuracy, etc.) at nearly 1/3-1/2 the price, resolution aside.

[StiMpACk]

I am not sure if you read my post above, but I would give it another look. :)

In my opinion 120hz is a complete gimmick feature in most applications. Especially so if one wants to see the media as intended.

While I will agree that the Samsung LCD's seem to perform the best (750 Series on up), plasma represents such a better value. One must purchase the 750 series LCD's just to come close to equaling (not surpassing) what the 720p Panasonic plasmas already do very well (Black levels, motion, color accuracy, etc.) at nearly 1/3-1/2 the price, resolution aside.

yeah if i was to recommend a plasma would definitely be panasonic or pioneer. i dont think panasonic swivels though, nor does it have a vga(atleast not in the 80u series) so if hes connecting it to a comp with no dvi or hdmi, uh oh ><;

[jliedeka]

I would agree that Pannys are probably one of the best values. Their black levels are second only to Pioneer and their colors are better. I wouldn't overlook Samsung plasmas if you can find a good price. They are reputed to be decent.

Jim

[poutanen]

OP: we need more info...

Price range? Other sources that may feed into it? Desired size?

For a small TV, a flat panel LCD I think is one of the only options (under 32")

For a medium, there are a lot of decent plasmas for a decent price in the 42 and 50" sizes.

For large, it's projector all the way for cost vs. results. I'm not even convinced a 50" plasma is better than a 720p projector w/a 50" screen (if you can find/make one) for the money. A projector displayed on a proper sized screen can be just as bright as a plasma or LCD tv, but ambient light makes all the difference. A projector *may* make hooking into a computer easier, and DLP is ultra fast for games.

My old setup was an InFocus IN72 (480p projector) displayed on a 76" high contrast (grey) screen. From about 6' and back the pixels disappeared, and gaming on it was excellent (from a PS3 and PS2). The projector cost $800 back in the day, and the screen was $250.

[bandphan]

yeah if i was to recommend a plasma would definitely be panasonic or pioneer. i dont think panasonic swivels though, nor does it have a vga(atleast not in the 80u series) so if hes connecting it to a comp with no dvi or hdmi, uh oh ><;

there are vga to component converters;) as well as many other options for display mounts.

[Panjsheri]

LCD still has motion blur even at 4ms response times. Especially when it is side by side with a plasma.

The burn in issue with plasmas (Pioneer & Panasonic) specifically is really a moot point. I have said it many times, but you would have to intentionally burn the set in. (i.e. vivid/dynamic mode with most settings at or near maximum) I have seen a Panasonic TH-50px75U in vivid mode with a still image (Spiderman II dvd menu) for more than 6 hours that had no permanent effect on the set. There was image retention for about 20 minutes but it was completely gone thereafter.

I would not say that LCD's are more crisp. They sometimes appear sharper with a static image, but when there's motion it all changes.

Yes Plasma's have gotten a lot better with the burn in but the only reason I am saying the LCD's are crisper is because I had my PC connected to a plasma once and you couldnt read the letters properly it almost hurt to stare at but then when I used the LCD it was crisp and easy to look at, know what I mean???

[annunaki]

Yes Plasma's have gotten a lot better with the burn in but the only reason I am saying the LCD's are crisper is because I had my PC connected to a plasma once and you couldnt read the letters properly it almost hurt to stare at but then when I used the LCD it was crisp and easy to look at, know what I mean???

Not really? It sounds lik ethere was more at play here than just the orientation of the tv.

[poutanen]

Yes Plasma's have gotten a lot better with the burn in but the only reason I am saying the LCD's are crisper is because I had my PC connected to a plasma once and you couldnt read the letters properly it almost hurt to stare at but then when I used the LCD it was crisp and easy to look at, know what I mean???

Were they both the same resolution??? You could have been looking at a 720p plasma and a 1080p LCD.

[bandphan]

Were they both the same resolution??? You could have been looking at a 720p plasma and a 1080p LCD.

i dont think it would matter which resolution it was, once properly set up a 720p 42xx80u panny has top tier PQ with no motion blur;)

[poutanen]

i dont think it would matter which resolution it was, once properly set up a 720p 42xx80u panny has top tier PQ with no motion blur;)

He was saying the letters were blurry, so if one TV was a higher resolution than the other, that could account for the blurriness, no? :D

[bandphan]

He was saying the letters were blurry, so if one TV was a higher resolution than the other, that could account for the blurriness, no? :D

na, some was afoot.

[Panjsheri]

Not really? It sounds lik ethere was more at play here than just the orientation of the tv.

I dont really know what you mean but when I had tried this "Test" if you want to call it that all the TV's were 720p, 1080P was not out yet and I was using a DVI cable. The TV's were a 40 inch Sony LCD and a 42 inch LG plasma. I dont know why it looked blurry but it led me to buy a Sharp 52 and I got a 24 inch LCD for my computer I decided to stay away from TV's as PC monitors. Obviously things are different now with upgrades in the technology but I was just pointing out what I had experienced thats all.

[annunaki]

I dont really know what you mean but when I had tried this "Test" if you want to call it that all the TV's were 720p, 1080P was not out yet and I was using a DVI cable. The TV's were a 40 inch Sony LCD and a 42 inch LG plasma. I dont know why it looked blurry but it led me to buy a Sharp 52 and I got a 24 inch LCD for my computer I decided to stay away from TV's as PC monitors. Obviously things are different now with upgrades in the technology but I was just pointing out what I had experienced thats all.

Perhaps an issue with the DVI input on the Plasma?

[poutanen]

Another note about TV types, have DLP projection TVs fallen off the radar??? I was pleased with my SD DLP projector on a 76" screen, and there's a 67" samsung 1080p DLP projection TV for $2000-2500 on the market.

Seems to me like a good deal, considering the cheapest DLP 1080p projector is the InFocus X10, which is roughly $2000-2500 also, plus the screen, mount, etc, and the TV will have a better picture in situations with more ambient light. Plus the TV is LED lit instead of needing $300 bulbs every 3,000 hr (FWIW, it took me 2 years to put 1500 hours on my projector, using it as my main TV)...

Am I out to lunch? :D

[Jango2077]

As an owner of a Panasonic 50 800 THX whatever it's called.
I would suggest getting a LCD with a 120 Hz refresh rate. Why?
Now, I have not see the 120 Hz in action on Video games (On Movies 120Hz sucks!!!) But in theory the LCD should provide sharp edges when doing 360 turns or pans during game play. The plasma......all of them, even though the color accuracy is kick *** still produce a green trail during high contrast, high motion video movement.....which occurs all the time during gaming.

[poutanen]

As an owner of a Panasonic 50 800 THX whatever it's called.
I would suggest getting a LCD with a 120 Hz refresh rate. Why?
Now, I have not see the 120 Hz in action on Video games (On Movies 120Hz sucks!!!) But in theory the LCD should provide sharp edges when doing 360 turns or pans during game play. The plasma......all of them, even though the color accuracy is kick *** still produce a green trail during high contrast, high motion video movement.....which occurs all the time during gaming.

As far as I know, DLP is still better for gaming...

[Jango2077]

I had a DLP before the plasma.....it was pretty good.....but they say it has a little bit of a delay, which I noticed during Rock Band!

[poutanen]

I had a DLP before the plasma.....it was pretty good.....but they say it has a little bit of a delay, which I noticed during Rock Band!

Never played GH or RB on my projector, always my little 20" tube TV. However, some stations I would have to set the sound delay on my AVR to around 20-30 ms to get it to sync up.

That's totally different from trails or motion blur though... I played COD4, SOCOM3, GT4 and GT5:Prologue, Wiger Woods '08, and Madden '08 on my 76" and the motion blur was non-existant. Artifacts tend to be amplified when you go bigger, I can only imagine how a 76" LCD would look with a game.

I hear the latest generation are better, but still... :eek:

[Jango2077]

I looked @ a 50 or 46 inch Sony LCD with the 120Hz turned on during Spider-Man 2 it look weird or crappy. Depends on who you talk to.

[Panjsheri]

Perhaps an issue with the DVI input on the Plasma?

That could have been the case as now DVI is not offered on any of the new TV's.

[eejay]

This debate is quite interesting. I've read here and there that plasma (even LCD) is dead and OLED will be the latest and greatest as it will be thinner, brighter last longer, more energy efficient, etc. I love watching sports and movies so my choice is plasma in a heartbeat. Not a big fan of image blurring. When do you think this new flat panel will hit the market?

My question regarding flat panels is this: 1080p or no 1080p?

I may or may not by a blu-ray and from what I understand no one broadcasts in 1080p. If I'm not a gamer, am I wasting money buying a 1080p?

Looking forward to all the responses. :)

[bandphan]

Could you provide some info on your room, seating distance, sources ect

[E-A-G-L-E-S]

As an owner of a Panasonic 50 800 THX whatever it's called.
I would suggest getting a LCD with a 120 Hz refresh rate. Why?
Now, I have not see the 120 Hz in action on Video games (On Movies 120Hz sucks!!!) But in theory the LCD should provide sharp edges when doing 360 turns or pans during game play. The plasma......all of them, even though the color accuracy is kick *** still produce a green trail during high contrast, high motion video movement.....which occurs all the time during gaming.

Some manufacturers sets are better than others with this.
Also, only a select very small percentage of people are affected by this, much less than say dlp's RBE.

[ragged]

For gaming I would get a 1080p LCD with a matte screen. Maybe Sammy LN40A630. If FPS is your main concern, LG has a 47LG90 that has 2.7 ms response time. I would never get a plasma for gaming, even if you're a semi-hardcore gamer. I mean, how many real gamers out there use a plasma?

[bandphan]

For gaming I would get a 1080p LCD with a matte screen. Maybe Sammy LN40A630. If FPS is your main concern, LG has a 47LG90 that has 2.7 ms response time. I would never get a plasma for gaming, even if you're a semi-hardcore gamer. I mean, how many real gamers out there use a plasma?

really, for real:confused: Other than 1 lcd on the market, which display over 42" in lcd resolves motion better and at an acceptable resolution? I give you a hint, none.

[poutanen]

really, for real:confused: Other than 1 lcd on the market, which display over 42" in lcd resolves motion better and at an acceptable resolution? I give you a hint, none.

+1 I'm still of the DLP camp for gaming...

[ragged]

really, for real:confused: Other than 1 lcd on the market, which display over 42" in lcd resolves motion better and at an acceptable resolution? I give you a hint, none.

Uh yeah, for real. It's just my opinion. I'm not a cyborg, I can't tell the difference between 2ms and 6ms. It's all market speak as far as I'm concerned. From Wii tennis, to Socom Confrontation to Rfactor, anything under 6ms is fine for gaming.

There's a reason why computer monitors are LCD. I'm not sure if many plasma owners would feel comfortable falling asleep on the couch while the PS3 home screen is blazing on the screen. All the gamers I link up with every other weekend all have LCD's. And I would take a DLP over plasma for gaming any day too.

[bandphan]

Its all good. But there is a reason Computer monitors, under 24 inches are lcd and it has nothing to do with plasma. If you do some gaming on a large display, plasma will give you more than you can ever hope for from a lcd. Also i wouldnt drive a car without oil in it, but hey some abuse their purchases

PS. Ill be back.

[MADCOW]

To me, no plasma looks as good as most of the newer 120hz lcds. In motion, I really don't see much a difference even side by side, and the overall presentaion of the lcds just looks superior to my eyes.

Plasmas look much better on paper compared to lcds, but they just don't look better to my eyes, and I know several other people who feel the same way, some of which own a plasma and regret it after seeing buddy's lcd's.

Many people buy plasmas because they did research and the specs look better, or because other people told them to, or because they bought the plasmas, back when lcds sucked, not because they actually think plasmas look better than newer, high end lcds. Maybe better than the old lcds, but not the newer, high end 120hz. Not for overall presentation.

At least to my eyes, plasmas just look fuzzy by comparison. Not nearly as crisp as newer LCDs, non of the plasmas are, not even panny.

I currently own a 60hz lcd, and I game on it. A buddy of mine who owns an Hitachi plasma thinks my Tv looks way better on games than his. He said this himself. I have seen games on his tv, and it's ridiculous how fuzzy it looks by comparison. Still shots are nowhere close to as good as on even a low end lcd, this is way more noticeable than any motion advantage of the plasma. I know not all plasmas are equal, but neither are lcds, and my Toshiba 60hz baby blows away my buddy's and my Dad's plasmas (both Hitatchi Plasmas), for overall presentation.

Not to mention on my Buddies plasma during movies and stuff images go all smudgy. Like when someone is running, the legs look like a big blob. And no, it's not the source, and his plasma is not that old.

Even a good looking plasma, doesn't look as good overall though as the best newer lcds.

[bandphan]

To me, no plasma looks as good as most of the newer 120hz lcds. In motion, I really don't see much a difference even side by side, and the overall presentaion of the lcds just looks superior to my eyes.

Maybe so, however the dofference between 500 lines and 900 lines is tremendous

Plasmas look much better on paper compared to lcds, but they just don't look better to my eyes, and I know several other people who feel the same way, some of which own a plasma and regret it after seeing buddy's lcd's.

Its ok, cause it is your eyes

Many people buy plasmas because they did research and the specs look better, or because other people told them to, or because they bought the plasmas, back when lcds sucked, not because they actually think plasmas look better than newer, high end lcds. Maybe better than the old lcds, but not the newer, high end 120hz. Not for overall presentation.

So not true, as matter of fact most sets that have 120hz setting look worse with them engadged.

At least to my eyes, plasmas just look fuzzy by comparison. Not nearly as crisp as newer LCDs, non of the plasmas are, not even panny.

I welcome you to see my display anytime you like, not fuzzy and I guarentee you one of the best pictures you will see in your life, and how do you measure crisp?

I currently own a 60hz lcd, and I game on it. A buddy of mine who owns an Hitachi plasma thinks my Tv looks way better on games than his. He said this himself. I have seen games on his tv, and it's ridiculous how fuzzy it looks by comparison. Still shots are nowhere close to as good as on even a low end lcd, this is way more noticeable than any motion advantage of the plasma. I know not all plasmas are equal, but neither are lcds, and my Toshiba 60hz baby blows away my buddy's and my Dad's plasmas (both Hitatchi Plasmas), for overall presentation.

Ok, model and year on the Hitatchis? Hell im starting to sound like a plasma fanboy:rolleyes:

Not to mention on my Buddies plasma during movies and stuff images go all smudgy. Like when someone is running, the legs look like a big blob. And no, it's not the source, and his plasma is not that old.

Even a good looking plasma, doesn't look as good overall though as the best newer lcds.

Maybe you do a review of your buddy's lcd you seem to like it;):rolleyes::p

http://hdguru.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/2008-resolution-tests-125-hdtvs.pdf

[MADCOW]

"So not true, as matter of fact most sets that have 120hz setting look worse with them engadged."

I'm not talking about weither the 120hz is engaged or not, 120hz lcds are just better, have more to offer over 60hz models in addition to the 120hz.

Of course as a plasma owner, your inclined to think that way, but many people who don't own either and who are shopping for a new HDTV think lcds look better, untill someone comes along and convinces them through spec talk that they are not.

I have seen it happen more than once. Almost everyone I have met thinks LCDs look better before they learned anything about it.

And I know what my own eyes tell me. If my eyes are bad, so are thousands of other people's I guess. Like I said, some plasmas are better than others, but I know what I have seen, and I'm not the only one. My Dad can't even watch hockey without the puck dissappearing. Plasma guys will say it's the source. Ok, well, how come the puck doesn't dissappear on my lcd?

And I know not ALL plasmas have this problem, so let's not get into that, that's not the point.

Even better plasmas don't looks as good as high end lcds to me, so it's not just a few select models that are inferior which you would probably like to beleive.

Plasma owners should just print out a giant copy of their tv's specs and paste it onto their shinny, glossy screens so that the specs are all they can see when they watch their tv's because that's all they care about anyway.

[allargon]

You have different eyes or poorly setup displays (likely). Only the lower end plasmas from LG, Akai, etc. look worse than the highest end Sony's, Sharp's, etc. The Pioneer, Fujitsu and Panasonics blow all the LCD's I've seen out of the water for superior color reproduction, black levels, etc. Even some DLP's look better to me than most LCD's. We won't even mention LCD's and motion resolution in the same sentence.

BTW, LCD's have always been the spec attention err...trollops of the display world touting things like contrast ratio, response time, resolution and frequency. To me, the 720p Pioneer Elite's look better than the 1080p Sharp's.

[bandphan]

"So not true, as matter of fact most sets that have 120hz setting look worse with them engadged.

I'm not talking about weither the 120hz is engaged or not, 120hz lcds are just better, have more to offer over 60hz models in addition to the 120hz.

There are a couple of LCDs that are fine displays, the Sammy A950 being the finest.

Of course as a plasma owner, your inclined to think that way, but many people who don't own either and who are shopping for a new HDTV think lcds look better, untill someone comes along and convinces them through spec talk that they are not.

Ive been doing this for a few years, and If you believe that im making statements based on the fact that i own a pdp, im not



I have seen it happen more than once. Almost everyone I have met thinks LCDs look better before they learned anything about it.

Ive sold/installed a 3 to 1 ratio plasma to lcd Im not saying anything about your friends preferences. Contrast, black levels, and motion resolution matter, and thats not just "numbers"

And I know what my own eyes tell me. If my eyes are bad, so are thousands of other people's I guess. Like I said, some plasmas are better than others, but I know what I have seen, and I'm not the only one. My Dad can't even watch hockey without the puck dissappearing. Plasma guys will say it's the source. Ok, well, how come the puck doesn't dissappear on my lcd?

And I know not ALL plasmas have this problem, so let's not get into that, that's not the point.

Yes, a poor display is a poor display, no matter the tech

Even better plasmas don't looks as good as high end lcds to me, so it's not just a few select models that are inferior which you would probably like to beleive.

Get what you like
Plasma owners should just print out a giant copy of their tv's specs and paste it onto their shinny, glossy screens so that the specs are all they can see when they watch their tv's because that's all they care about anyway.

No we will just snicker at your crappy picture:p

On a serious note, get what ever display you like, im not here to talk you out of anything

[MADCOW]

DITTO,

But don't try to indoctrinate people into the world of tech bullshit. We all know from speakers that the ones with the best specs on paper, don't always sound the best. Tvs are no different. There is a placebo effect associated with specs. Once you believe something to be better, you look for it to be.

Just because plasmas look better on paper than lcds, but not in person to me, doesn't mean I have something wrong with my eyes. It means I have a brain. My own brain.

I will be upgrading my tv in a few months, and I won't go plasma if someone paid me to. They just don't look as good to me, simple as that.

The only thing you guys will be "snickering" at, is the tech comparison that you've been brainwashed by.

[bandphan]

Ok, i was being sarcastic with the snickering comment;) Since you have offered nothing to conversation but subjective opinons and refuse to even look at the techno bable thats been offered, ill repeat myself----get what ever you want:)

[MADCOW]

That's the point!!!

Tv buying should be about subjective opinion of the image, NOT spec sheets!