Plasma vs. LCD - which is better

[klh1]

I am going to be purchasing a HDTV in the very near future and am confused as to which is better for viewing, value, and size. My viewing room is only 22x17 or so. If anyone is able to assist me with basic information, it would be appreciated.

 

[sholling]

Each has advantages over the other but plasma is yesterday's wonder technology and most companies are moving away from it in favor of LCD.

 

[klh1]

So pretty much you are saying that LCD is the way to go? As far as size of screen for the size of room I have, would 42" be a pretty good size. I kinda think if I go any bigger, I will feel as though I am sitting right on top of the screen. Any ideas?

 

[Hi Ho]

If you want my opinion, plasma is still the better technology when it comes to picture quality. It is far from being "yesterdays wonder technology". I work with both types of displays from a variety of manufacturers every day and I would not by an LCD for myself. Plasma offers a better picture all around. Until something the meets or beats plasma comes around plasma is still king no matter how much the LCD fans claim it isn't. LCD has come a long way but it still has a long way to go. I'm not sure it will ever get there.

I recently had a chance to compare a Panasonic TH-50PZ700u plasma to a Sony KDL-46XBR4 LCD using the same HD source (Dish Network VIP722 HD DVR) and to put it bluntly, there was absolutely no comparison. Sure, the LCD looked pretty on bright colorful still scenes but throw in some darker areas and some motion and you have a mess compared to the plasma. The info banners and guide from the 722 looked bad on LCD too. Instead of being smooth everything was jagged. I tried every video processing option and resolution available.

That's not to say there aren't pros and cons to each. There are some situations where a plasma simply wouldn't be the best choice (extremely bright room and constant static images) but in most home settings I would choose nothing other than a good plasma display.

The Panasonic TH-42PZ77u would be a good display to look at. It has an antiglare matte finish just like LCD sets. The TH-42PZ700u has the standard glass front.

 

[Jack Hammer]

IMO plasma's still offer better black levels and overall picture quality. LCDs offer less electrical draw and a better resistance to burn in (though many plasmas are pretty good too, but not all). LCDs pictures don't move as smoothly as plasmas, this is something that bothers some viewers more than others). Even though I truly believe plasma to offer the better overall picture and viewing experience, I still bought an lcd due to my viewing habits. You really need to weigh the benefits of both against your needs to decide which is best for you.

Jack

 

[1tribeca]

If you like the look of CRT televisions (like we've all be staring at for 50 years) then plasma will make you happier. LCD is more useful in bright room situations as mentioned. Sony is a good place to go if you decide on LCD...for plaz, Pioneer is leagues ahead (if you can drop that kinda coin) if not, Panasonic make a nice, robust panel for moderate cash!

I think both technologies are nearing the end of their lifecycles...plasma a little sooner I think. OLED is on the horizon, but it's gonna be a while til the screens are big enough & cheap enough that the public will buy in mass quantities.

Personally, I'm holding out for 90 days until Pioneer release their 9th gen. panels. I'll snag one immediately and enjoy it for years. Will it be obsolete in a year or so, for sure...but who cares it's a spectacular piece of work!

 

[bandphan]

I am going to be purchasing a HDTV in the very near future and am confused as to which is better for viewing, value, and size. My viewing room is only 22x17 or so. If anyone is able to assist me with basic information, it would be appreciated.

did you search this? this topic is / has been threaded out. What is your budget, what sources will the tv be displaying, what are the lighting conditions, is it the main tv ? These are some points that could be helpful when someone is giving you basic information. Try the search, heck just look on this page alone, im positive you will a plether of basic info.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19905z

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41455

 

[klh1]

Thanks to all of you for your information. I will continue to do research. It was mentioned what my budget would be. Well of course, I want the best for as little as possible. I am a single mom on a limited budget so below 1500.00 is ideal.

 

[bandphan]

As for plasma you can pick up this http://tweeter.com/product/PRO950HD.asp for a couple hundred less than advertised. Dlp would be a tech to look into, bang for buck http://tweeter.com/product/WD57734.asp

 

[Gatsby191]

My, not so simple, test(s) did it for me...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------I have been to like 10 different BBs, CCs, PC Richards, Sears, etc, and I was able to do this simple side by side(well not exactly side by side)test on 3 occasions so far. Here it is: Took a certain Movie by Disney Pixar with talking CARS in it, and another certain movie with Bruce Willis in it (Live Free or Die Hard), and had them played on both a Plasma and a LCD.(both 1080P) One time with both sets playing the same movie, at the same time with the DVD signal split to both sets, and one time with seperate dvd player hooked up to each set. Not the sales person, not me, and not anyone else who happenned to catch this demo could deny that the PLASMAs had a better PQ no matter what brand set was used, and the screen sizes were all comparable too. BTW: Lighting was "normal" in every demo. The action was more on the money with plasma, the colors more vibrant, and every detail more precise. Of course this is only MHO, and everyone else's HO that witnessed these demos. I know I am going to hear about the lack of a demo on broadcasts, but in all honesty, the few Basketball games, or Soccer Games that I noticed on a few occasions, looked as sharp as ever on the Plasmas too. But the movie test told me everything that I needed to know in order to pick the winner in this LCD vs. Plasma dilema.
Take care all, Joe B.
__________________

 

[croseiv]

I sure do prefer the picture quality of plasma over LCD (still).

 

[jonnythan]

I just roll my eyes at anyone that says that plasma is an older technology.

LCD is a much "older" technology. LCD screens have been on digital watches, calculators, notebook computers, etc etc, for 30 years.

IMO, good plasma TVs still handily outpace even the best LCD TVs in terms of picture and motion quality. As noted, the downsides are reflective glass (which gives you a more vivid picture) and lower potential overall brightness.

Plasma is also cheaper when you get to 50" and above.

 

[sholling]

The point is that plasmas still burn in I don't care what the makers claim - important if the kids are playing games. And the price of LCD is such that you can get a good consumer level 46" set for $1500-1800. Sorry folks, plasma may have the black levels but historically they haven't held up over time (durability) and in 5 years they will have gone the way of the dinosaur. If I were to buy a set today it would be a 52-60 inch LCD, but I'm also excited by the possibilities of the upcoming laser based DLP systems. I've been reading promises about them for 10 years so I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Hi Ho]

And the price of LCD is such that you can get a good consumer level 46" set for $1500-1800.

The problem is that even the best LCD sets costing much more than that cannot compare to a plasma in that same price range. It's not just black levels. It's also color accuracy, viewing angles, motion, shadow detail, and image smoothness.

Yes, burn-in can happen but these days it is worried about much more than it should be. Certain manufacturers (IE: Samsung, off brands) still have problems but as far as Panasonic and Pioneer are concerned, it's a moot point.

Sorry folks, plasma may have the black levels but historically they haven't held up over time (durability) and in 5 years they will have gone the way of the dinosaur.

Plasma sets are every bit as reliable as LCD sets. The failure rate for Panasonic and Pioneer is extremely low.

 

[MDS]

The problem is that even the best LCD sets costing much more than that cannot compare to a plasma in that same price range. It's not just black levels. It's also color accuracy, viewing angles, motion, shadow detail, and image smoothness.

Everyone has their preferences but I'm going to say it again. All of that is entirely subjective and the vast majority neither notice nor care. Like everyone else I've owned a CRT for a long time and I tell you the difference in black level between a CRT (and hence Plasma which is considered to be a close contender to CRT in that regard) is just not that significant.

There is a reason the entire industry is shifting towards LCD. Fight it if you want, but that is the trend. If you ask Plasma fans why they chose Plasma over LCD all they can say is 'picture quality' which is entirely non-quantifiable and subjective. If you made a list of LCD advantages vs disadvantages vis a vis Plasma, LCD wins hands down. The elusive 'picture quality' argument is lost on the vast majority of the TV buying public but the real tangible benfefits of LCD are easier to understand (I'm not going to recite them because we've discussed this crap ad nauseum). The super simple comparison is to ask a simple TV viewer if they can discern whether a 'black' image is 0 IRE like it should be or a slightly higher number and the response will be Uh...I don't know and I don't care.

But hey, pick what you like...that is all that matters.

 

[Hi Ho]

I'm well aware of the trends. Trends aren't always for the better (often they aren't) and in my opinion the trend toward LCD technology is for the worse. It's a step backwards. I know that the average buyer doesn't give a damn about truely good picture quality. Picture quality is measurable. Contrast ratio and color acurracy are the two major components of good picture quality and the fact is the plasma wins those tests hands down. The primary goal of a display device is to display a picture. So, why would anyone who gives a damn about picture quality want to sacrifice that in lieu of some other percived advantage? Those who actually care about picture quality are in the minority, just like audio quality. I am simply stating my opinion. The original poster asked what was the better technology of the two. I answered.

This is an argument I will never win with some people so maybe I'll just shut up.

 

[MDS]

Hey Hi Ho,
I understand that you are stating an opinion but I also believe that the masses just don't care about perceived 'picture quality'. Picture quality is subjective and although measurements can quantify some asects of it the majoirty just doesn't care - instead they look at more quantifiable aspects
such as weight, power consumption, brightness, etc.

It really is pointless to argue/discuss the perceived differences because people will choose what they feel is best for their particular cirumstance and preference...it's just that preference seems to be clearly in favor of LCD; right or wrong, it is what it is.

 

[Pyrrho]

I am going to be purchasing a HDTV in the very near future and am confused as to which is better for viewing, value, and size. My viewing room is only 22x17 or so. If anyone is able to assist me with basic information, it would be appreciated.

Here is a link that lists the pros and cons of each in an easy to understand format:

http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/S-friCCSWpsAo/learningcenter/home/tv_flatpanel.html

As for burn-in on plasma TVs, forum rules forbid me from expressing my opinion of the intelligence of those who say it is a thing of the past. If burn-in were a thing of the past, the first brand that "solved" the problem would have given a warranty against it and bragged about it as a sales tactic. Before buying a plasma TV, download the manual for it from the manufacturers web site and read it to see what they say about burn-in. The people who say it is a thing of the past literally don't know what they are talking about. If they only read the manual to their plasma TVs they would know that it is very real.

To those who still insist it isn't real, READ YOUR DAMN MANUAL! What does the manufacturer say about it? Do you know more about it than they do? Yeah, right.

 

[Pyrrho]

The point is that plasmas still burn in I don't care what the makers claim ...

The manufacturers all claim it is very real. Just look at the warnings in the owner's manuals. It is misinformed people at sites like this one who claim that burn-in on plasma isn't real, not the manufacturers, who warn against it and tell you that there is no warranty against it.

 

[Pyrrho]

...

Yes, burn-in can happen but these days it is worried about much more than it should be. Certain manufacturers (IE: Samsung, off brands) still have problems but as far as Panasonic and Pioneer are concerned, it's a moot point.
...

Both Panasonic and Pioneer disagree with you. If you don't believe me, visit their web sites and download their owner's manuals for yourself. You will see that they both warn you about burn-in, which they would not need to do if it were not a real possibility with their sets.