# Plasma vs LCD?



## Guest

Hi guys, new to the forum and looking for a little help, because I don't know a thing about TVs. I'm looking for a new TV for my living room and I saw a Vizio at the store that seemed like a pretty good deal ($1,400). It was this 47 inch XVT LCD http://www.vizio.com/productDetails.aspx?id=1640&pid=1504. 

I hadn't heard of Vizio before so I looked at their website and found out there's a 50 inch XVT plasma coming out for the same price, which is this http://www.vizio.com/productDetails.aspx?id=1600&pid=1502. 

So I have a few questions. First, which is better, LCDs or Plasmas and why is the price of the plasmas less? Also, does Vizio make a good TV? I hadn't heard of them, but they say they use the same parts as Panasonic. Would either of these be a good TV, or could you recommend something in the same price range?

Thanks for the help, 

Brian


----------



## tonyvdb

It depends on your budget, Vizio is not a great brand name and may or may not last. They tend to use cheep parts and this over time may cause early failure.
There are lots of things to consider when buying a display. Lighting conditions affect how well the display will preform. LCD and Plasma both have good and bad points. LCD looks better in a darker room and Plasma has great contrast so will work in well lit rooms better. Plasma gets hot and needs good ventilation. DLP is another option but is not as thin as the others due to the rear projection nature of the display. 

I have seen many great deals on good brand name displays including a Sony 52" LCD at under $1500.


----------



## E-A-G-L-E-S

Plasmas look better than LCD's in dim rooms....due to their lower black levels and higher ansi contrasts.

LCD's are brighter.
Plasmas handle motion better.
LCD has a cleaner image.
Plasmas have phosphor lag.(though I've never seen it)
LCD's have sample and hold = blur.
Plasmas are more film-like.
LCD's are more video-like.


----------



## salvasol

I agree with Tony and Matt :yes:

Here is a  chart  I found on CNET that compares both Plasma and LCD.

Remember that "We get what we pay for", so, if you have the extra money to buy something better do it (just look online for reviews to get and idea); go look at the TV (if there's any way that you can take it to your place where it will be used, do it) ...most sotores don't have TV calibrated properly, so after you get your new TV (plasma or LCD) don't forget to calibrate it to get the best picture :yes:


----------



## Mike P.

Plasmas apparently lose their brightness 3 times as fast as a LCD, from what I've read.


----------



## E-A-G-L-E-S

Iwould doubt that given th half lives....but could be wrong.
Either way 50K-100k hours is going to take a LONG time. 
I'd be more worried about LED lifespan in the new LCD's....though not much at all.


----------



## thxgoon

Agreed with most of above. Half lives on modern displays render the difference in plasma/lcd lifespans moot. Cheap parts may still lead to early failure but hard to tell.

I've never heard of phosophor lag, from what I've read each individual cell is flashed several times per second making motion instantaneous. I personally prefer the look of plasmas as more natural. Lcd's look very enhanced and fake IMHO.


----------



## pitriago

Agreed. I cannot tolerate the sight of LCD displays. They all too blocky & blurry to me. The video artefacts do not allow me to see anything else.


----------



## Guest

Ive always wondered that my self good answers guys....


----------



## SteveCallas

Both plasma and LCD have made enough advancements that nowadays the primary difference is going to be whether you can live with a glossy screen or not. The majority of plasmas have glossy screens, and if you don't like seeing your reflection or the reflection of objects in your room during dark scenes, it can become very annoying. 

Plasmas are generically given the nod in terms of black level performance, however, this is an oversight based on the popularity of the Pioneer Kuros. If you disregard the Pioneer Kuro, and compare other plasmas like Panasonic, Samsung, LG, or Vizio to say Sony XBR or the upper level Samsung LCDs, you'll actually find that the LCDs have a lower measured black level and higher contrast ratio. Not every plasma is a Pioneer Kuro.


----------



## E-A-G-L-E-S

There are MUCH bigger differences than the screens on lcd's and plasmas.
Even the two top LCD's which you named that use local dimming still have off axis issues with contrast, black level and screen uniformity.
Not to mention Sample and Hold.
And those are the top two LCD's.
I would take a Panny or Sammy plasma over any LCD to date, let alone a Kuro.

-jme


----------



## SteveCallas

Sorry, should have been more clear - not the local dimming LED LCDs, but rather just the Sony XBR6 and Samsung 630, 650, or 750 series. Not counting the Pioneer Kuros, plasma black levels on the whole nowadays aren't always better like many are led to believe.


----------



## thxgoon

I'd argue your point on the glossiness of screens. I think that unless you are in a very bright environment or have windows at such an angle that they glare on the screen plasmas will do fine.


----------



## E-A-G-L-E-S

Also, most LCD's nowadays use glossy screens.


----------



## SteveCallas

It's not only glare, it's seeing your own reflection in the tv screen. That's something that should have disappeared once and for all with tube tvs, it really takes you out of the experience.

Most LCDs use glossy screens? :scratch: No. A few Samsung models come in both glossy and matte screens, but aside from those, I'm not familiar with many others.


----------



## thxgoon

SteveCallas said:


> It's not only glare, it's seeing your own reflection in the tv screen.


I haven't seen that on tv's since the tube days, and even then it wasn't bad. My current living room setup employs a 3 year old panasonic plasma with a sliding glass door on the left wall and skylights in the ceiling. I've never noticed any glare let alone seen my face in the screen!


----------



## Guest

I've been debating Pioneer plasma vs Sony TFT (50") for a while.

We've just installed two new Pioneer plasmas at work, had both down on lowered brightness and contrast as per the avoiding plasma burn instructions and both suffer from burn. I just couldn't handle paying-out a lot of money on a screen and having screen-burn. So it's going to be TFT for me.

I'd love the Pioneer blacks for movies, but will be using the screen for gaming (3-4 hours at a time) and just know that this would wreck the screen.


----------



## lcaillo

What kind of burn did these sets have and from what kinds of images? Please post some specific information so that people can put your experience in a meaningful context.

While it is true that differential aging is sometimes hard to avoid in phosphor based sets like PDPs, it is very uncommon in a short time in recent PDPs that are not run at full contrast or nearly so. Under normal home viewing conditions, even with gaming, what you describe is usually limited to displaying the same thing for very long periods of time, such as news banners and tickers.


----------



## E-A-G-L-E-S

Prowse said:


> I've been debating Pioneer plasma vs Sony TFT (50") for a while.
> 
> We've just installed two new Pioneer plasmas at work, had both down on lowered brightness and contrast as per the avoiding plasma burn instructions and both suffer from burn. I just couldn't handle paying-out a lot of money on a screen and having screen-burn. So it's going to be TFT for me.
> 
> I'd love the Pioneer blacks for movies, but will be using the screen for gaming (3-4 hours at a time) and just know that this would wreck the screen.


You got permanent burn-in on both Kuro's?
From what?


----------



## Guest

E-A-G-L-E-S said:


> You got permanent burn-in on both Kuro's?
> From what?


Yep, only slight burn but it's there on both Panasonic displays.

We have both screens used as a permanent video-link between two offices, so the images are very static most of the time. Even with pixel shifting, much reduced contrast etc, they've still slightly burnt. NB: We could detect burn after one days use.

I know that I'll be gaming on the screen I select, which could be for several hours at weekend. I'd hate to get damage to a screen. It's basically screen burn & fluorescence vs dead pixels & blur. Choices, choices.


----------



## lcaillo

Sounds like you had some image retention, which is really different than burn-in. Burn-in is actually differential aging in parts of the display and is permanent, though it can get covered up in time by reverse aging patterns. IR is a temporary condition.


----------



## E-A-G-L-E-S

Prowse said:


> Yep, only slight burn but it's there on both Panasonic displays.
> 
> We have both screens used as a permanent video-link between two offices, so the images are very static most of the time. Even with pixel shifting, much reduced contrast etc, they've still slightly burnt. NB: We could detect burn after one days use.
> 
> I know that I'll be gaming on the screen I select, which could be for several hours at weekend. I'd hate to get damage to a screen. It's basically screen burn & fluorescence vs dead pixels & blur. Choices, choices.


As said above, sounds like IR.
Also, you had stated they were Pioneer's before but Panasonic's now?


----------



## Owen Bartley

I'm out looking for a new 50" display in the next few months, and as of right now I'm open to either plasma or LCD, although after reading this thread I may start with the plasmas. The room it will be going in has good light control, and a wide viewing angle, so off axis picture will be important. Features aren't going to be a deciding factor, the most important will be overall picture quality. HDMI 1.3 would be important, and several HDMI inputs would be helpful since I do not have a switching receiver. Finally, I'd like to keep the budget around $2,000 CDN. I'll be checking out stores over the next little while, and I'll try to report back any findings. Recommendations are always welcome.


----------



## Wright712

I would recommend the Pioneer Kuro as mentioned previously in the thread. Check with forum sponsors. These days prices are falling to below $2000 USD. My $0.02 (USD) :bigsmile:


----------



## Owen Bartley

Wow, really? Kuros below $2,000? Quickly checking Future Shop and Best Buy gives me a best CDN price of $3,200. I will definitely keep an eye out though.


----------



## the_rookie

I dont see the big deal of the kuro.

I have a panasonic, and watched; The Descent, The Cave and I Am Legend, both at times featuring near pitch black, or pitch black enviroments, and it looked as real as any TV can get close to being.

My dad and I own Panasonic Plasmas, best TVs out there. I wouldnt buy any other flat screen TV even if I had the money. I also know i would never waste my money on a LCD. I can instantly tell the difference between a Plasma and LCD.

I bought my 46" 1080p Panasonic from Costco for $989.99


----------



## lcaillo

The big deal is that the blacks are more black. It is simple really. You do not find the small difference important enough to pay the extra $$ for and other people do. The blacks on your Panasonic are a lighter shade of gray than on the Pioneer. Is it a big enough distraction to justify the cost? For you or for me, it may not be that important. For many it is. I would like to know where they are discounted so much, however, if it is true.


----------



## the_rookie

However that may be, have ya read the new article?

I quote;



> Last week, Pioneer announced it was killing off its critically acclaimed TV business by March 2010 and will concentrate on car and audio/visual systems. It was a dramatic fall for a company that just one year ago had CES abuzz with its newest plasma TV, the so-called “Ultimate Black” Kuro.
> 
> Panasonic is in good position to benefit from Kuro’s death. Most of the Pioneer engineers who came up with Kuro switched sides and are now working for Panasonic. In addition, recent demos have shown that Panasonic plasmas are nearing Kuro quality.


----------



## lcaillo

It is unlikely that Panasonic will duplicate the Kuro in the short term. Corporate and engineering momentum generally takes much more than a few engineers being transplanted to change. Over time the performance of the Pioneer is likely to be equalled or bettered but don't expect it right away. The Pioneer sets should remain available for some time well into this year, perhaps until early 2010.


----------



## Owen Bartley

Well, I've been shopping around, and I started out focused on plasmas, in particular the Panasonic Viera 80 and 800 series, which seem to get good reviews and be the budget alternative to the Kuro (at least the 80 series, the 800 is similarly priced). The Kuro looked great, and the Viera did too, however I found myself looking back at a lot of the LCD monitors as well. There was a Sony LCD next to the Panny, and it consistently looked sharper, and the off-axis viewing was completely fine. Also the Samsung LCDs looked very sharp, and had pretty good colour. 

Now all of this was in a store setup environment, and a few of the sets were being fed the same signal (Panny and Sony) split to about 30 sets, and a few (Kuro, Samsung) each had their own BluRay players, so there were signal quality and consistency issues for sure, but if nothing else was learned from that trip, it's that there are a lot of good looking displays out there right now, and it seems like it is more difficult to choose something bad these days. More research and viewing is required, and I'll try to check out some more high end stores, to find each set with its own dedicated source material.


----------



## lcaillo

My experience with the sets is that there are things to like and dislike about either. The LCD sets have come a long way and have closed the gap to the point where you have to compare model vs model rather than generalize about the technologies. Decide what your priorities are and look for those points in comparison. Whatever you do, get the set calibrated properly.


----------



## texfrazer

Owen Bartley said:


> however I found myself looking back at a lot of the LCD monitors as well. There was a Sony LCD next to the Panny, and it consistently looked sharper, and the off-axis viewing was completely fine. Also the Samsung LCDs looked very sharp, and had pretty good colour.QUOTE]
> 
> Hi Owen,
> 
> One of the things to remember when looking at plasmas and LCDs in the store is that most LCDs are capable of producing a brighter image than a plasma (by brighter, I mean that it has a higher lumen output). Therefore, the LCD's will typically draw your attention more when placed side by side, like in a store setting. However, none of the store models are anywhere near calibrated.
> 
> Good luck on the hunt. I have a plasma (Panasonic Viera 70) and my parents have an LCD (Samsung 630). I really enjoy watching both of them, so nowadays, I don't think you'll go wrong with either.


----------



## trismegistus

SteveCallas said:


> Not every plasma is a Pioneer Kuro.


i agree


----------



## Owen Bartley

Yep, I'm still looking, while trying to ignore the store display brightness/contrast. It seems that the easiest thing to focus on is the sharpness of the picture, and so far from what I've seen, the advantage seems to be with LCD, particularly the Samsung 700 series (LN52A750). I'm going to eventually narrow my list down to a couple of both plasma and LCD displays and find a way to spend some time with each one hooked directly to a nice BluRay source, and play with settings.


----------



## the_rookie

Hey Owen, may I ask what your viewing distance is for the plasmas? Also, what size of TVs you are viewing?


----------



## Warpdrv

I have to agree with most if not everything said here about LCD vs Plasma... 

I was just shopping at Best Buy and chatting quite a bit with the cute girl that was in that dept. they had an entire wall of the store dedicate to both types of displays... I was there shopping for a TV that I had to fit in a certain spot for my mom, I grabbed a 26" sharp that had a built in DVD player, just for ease of use for her. For her, its fine and better then what she had that died.

I honestly don't care for LCD, I have a 42" & 50" 720p panasonic pro panels, and to me they are better then any LCD I have seen even though they are not 1080p. Today I pulled the trigger on a Panasonic 65" PZ850U for an awesome price, and I'll be doing all my scaling with an Anthem D2v, I'm really excited to get that bad boy up and running... 

It may not beat the Pioneer in blacks, I'll give that up for the extra 5", but I have seen the 58" unit and its just spectacular in nature. I have put off the 1080p upgrade for a long time, but now that I have the D2v on the way, it will be worth having a top notch display.


----------



## Warpdrv

Ahhh double post....


----------



## digitalfife

Absolute tosh


----------



## lcaillo

Care to translate? My Scottish slang is a bit rusty.


----------



## warpdrive

I just made the jump from LCD to Plasma for my main TV system

I went from an XBR2 to a Panasonic V series. 





I'm loving the beautiful blacks, it just kills the XBR2 in every way (not even close)
My room isn't very bright, but definitely in some ways I'm worse off

- Reflections in the screen are a lot more obvious. It's definitely a step back. I loved the matte screen of the LCD, hard to see any reflections at all even when a lamp was in the background. The new Plasma has (which is considered a good) AR screen so it already helps a lot but reflections are too obvious. You can see in my first picture that even with a lamp in the background, you can hardly notice it on the screen. With my second picture, the reflections made taking the picture very hard, that's why the image on the screen looks washed out.

- We still watch a fair bit of 4:3, and watching with light grey bars, or stretch modes (as recommended by the manual) really sucks. With LCD, I never worried about it and always ran SD in 4:3 mode with black bars.

- The Plasma burns 3 times the power consumption while on.

- Having to be extra careful during the first 100-1000 hours of burn-in (as recommended by Panasonic) is a nuisance. 

- I kind of miss the extra pop due to the brightness of the LCD. It just has more wow factor when watching sports and such. 

Other than that the TV is great but you definitely go four steps forward, three steps back. So for me, the switch was bittersweet.


----------



## tonyvdb

My Boss has a 42" plasma and has only had it for about a year and it already has burn in from the stupid logos that some networks keep up all the time. TLC is the worst as there logo is not transparent and has lots of red in it. Our CRT RPTV also has the TLC logo burnt in (you can see it when there is a white background) Networks really need to be more cautious about this.


----------



## SteveCallas

LCD blacks just keep getting better and better - they're much better now than they were from the days of the XBR2. As you mentioned, LCD has more "pop" and clarity to images too.

Attached are a couple shots with my Samsung LN52B750 using a cheapo camera from 2005 - where does the black end and the bezel begin? You can't really tell. LCDs couldn't do this even a year ago. Imagine where they will be 3-5 years from now. Meanwhile the Kuro from a year ago still represents the best plasma has to offer.

(The file size limit for attachments is really, really small here - sorry for the small size, it was the only way I could get under 200kb).


----------



## warpdrive

I don't disagree that the new LCD's are impressive compared to my XBR2. I actually looked at the Samsung (all of them including the LED backlit models) and new XBR7-8-9 but the Panasonic  still has better color and black levels, viewing angles, and it's cheaper to boot. 

Maybe in 1-4 years, LCD's will catch up or surpass it at less cost, but for now I don't regret it overall choosing plasma. It would seem like I regret it based on my post above, but I really don't

The only issue in my mind is not being able to use 4:3 black pillarboxes for extended periods like I did with LCD, which is unfortunate but I'll get used to it. I think I will use medium gray bars which is not as optimal to prevent burn-in, but I think is acceptable as long as I don't run SD for hours on end.


----------



## Owen Bartley

the_rookie said:


> Hey Owen, may I ask what your viewing distance is for the plasmas? Also, what size of TVs you are viewing?


Sorry, haven't been around much lately! I have recently switched pretty firmly over to the plasma side, and am waiting for the new Panasonic V10 to come out in 54" and 58" to check out. I'd guess I'm going to be around 10 feet or so from the display at the couch. I have still been researching and the V10 seems to get good reviews, including those of its 24p mode, which it handles at 96Hz and is supposed to be very smooth.

Warpdrv, I was looknig at the PZ850U as well, but figured I could wait for the new models... how are you liking yours? It was a very nice set.

Warpdrive (weird... 2 of you?), which model did you get? How do you like it? I thought about the G10 or G15, but I really want the 24p mode. Have you tested this out?


----------



## E-A-G-L-E-S

Nothing has changed that would make me change my mind. Not even close.


----------



## warpdrive

I'm not the same warpdrive as "warpdrv". I bought a 50V10. I *love *having the 96Hz mode, it makes all the difference and I look forward to watching 24p now


----------



## XxxBERRYxxX

I have always liked how a Plasma looks but I must admit the the LCD has come a long way in just a couple of years. I know people are always going to bring up the "burn in" stuff but my RP-TV is susceptible to "burn in" and I game for hours on end and I have "NO" burn in what so ever. If the set is calibrated correctly, the set will last a very long time. I guess when my Mitts. dies I'll consult the one guy I know that looks and sets up TV's all the time- my calibrator. I'll ask him what looks the best at the time after it's properly calibrated and tell him my viewing habits and go from there.


----------



## mfd4509

I have been researching this topic as well. I am trying to get up the courage to replaces IC's to fix the convergance issues my Mit projection set has now. Looks like I will buy plasma if I have to.


----------



## Drumzerbe

the_rookie said:


> Hey Owen, may I ask what your viewing distance is for the plasmas? Also, what size of TVs you are viewing?


I am just beginning the search for a new HD-TV, torn between LCD & Plasma and curious why you asked Owen about viewing distance from the plasma and size of screens?


----------



## ironglen

You'll want a higher resolution 1080 vs 720 if you sit closer. For example, my main seats are 16' away from my 50" 720 tv-picture looks great, but at the closer 8' seats I can see the deficiency (grainy). I don't care as the tv (plasma Pany) was $600 less than a 1080- and I don't sit in the closer seats!

There is a viewing table that recommends viewing distance, tv screen size, and resolution- it is a good thing to look at. I have excellent vision and couldn't see the difference between 1080 and 720 as the table I found stated.

As far as plasma vs lcd, these guidelines apply to both. I sometimes wish I had lcd because so many movies are not formatted to fit the screen size and I end up zooming in (which I dislike) in order to avoid burn-in. Perhaps I worry unnecessarily, but I don't want to chance it as I only watch 1-2 movies a week with little if any other programming, so haven't even had 50 hrs on it in months of use. The blacks and overall picture is really nice though, no doubt.


----------



## Drumzerbe

ironglen said:


> You'll want a higher resolution 1080 vs 720 if you sit closer. For example, my main seats are 16' away from my 50" 720 tv-picture looks great, but at the closer 8' seats I can see the deficiency (grainy). I don't care as the tv (plasma Pany) was $600 less than a 1080- and I don't sit in the closer seats!. . .


Ironglen, thank you for the clarification. Makes perfect sense. Where might I locate this table you mention? Is it at a websight? Thanks.


----------



## ironglen

I think I saw it at crutchfield's website, but here are a couple other sites:

http://www.cnet.com/hdtv-viewing-distance/
http://www.cnet.com/1990-7874_1-6307361-1.html
http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html

This last one looks pretty interesting- wish I'd found it earlier.

Good luck!


----------



## Drumzerbe

Thanks. I have only checked out that last one but it is very interesting information.


----------



## andy123

Plasma screens tend to come in a bigger range of sizes than LCDs, ant the black and gray colors tend to be richer than in an LCD tv.

However LCDs are generally lighter, less fragile and often easier to set up. Also older model plasmas, and some of the low-end models currently out there, have had issues with permanent screen damage when an image is left on the screen too long. However this has mostly been corrected in the newest models available.

My sister in law has a vizio and it looks great, and they've had a few minor issues but nothing to deter them from buying another one. Sony is great but you pay for the name more than anything. My uncle just got a samsung and the screen is great but the frame around the tv just looks a little clunky and cheap to me.


----------



## jambam

I for one just love Plasma's due to the picture and really wide viewing angle , that i still find lacking versus even current lcd's .

But one thing about plasma's is the heat they generate ,it will save some of your heating bills , but it's costing me in cooling cost where I am located


----------



## davidburn

Im currently looking for a new HDTV, I have a 37" Schaub Lorenz LCD that I use for my PC screen and Movies. Can a Plasma display PC images as well as a LCD can?


----------



## tonyvdb

Yes, however the burn in issues with Plasma makes it not a very good option for a PC or gaming display.


----------



## davidburn

I bought a Samsung 50", 100hz, full hd 1080p :bigsmile:and it does display the PC Ok, not as vibrant as the LCD but very natural colours. Im very happy with my choice so thanks to everyone that added to this thread as once I finished reading it my choice was made up to save the :spend: and buy a big Plasma.

As for the title: Plasma vs LCD? In my opinion if you have the extra money than buy a good quality full Hd LCD. Just my 2 cents worth.


----------



## warpdrive

I agree that if you want to use it as a PC monitor, LCD is a better choice due to burn-in, image retention issues with plasmas. I don't find LCD annoying at all for gaming.


----------



## Jon Liu

My two cents? Both are great technologies and both have their particular use.

If you are going to use it as a PC monitor, then I wouldn't suggest a plasma. LCDs are better "general purpose" monitors, IMO. LCDs are much more punchy.

Plasmas provide a more natural looking image compared to LCDs. Vibrancy, color saturation, detail all look more natural.

I think plasmas impress people less especially at the store because they don't have comparable peak brightness (not necessarily a bad thing), don't have as eye-popping of colors (again not necessarily a bad thing), and on paper they don't look as impressive.

But, as I said, both are good. I came from an Sony XBR-5 to the Pioneer Elite I have and I was worried about burn-in on my plasma, especially considering I am an avid gamer, too. Ever since I got my Pioneer Elite a year and three months ago, I've had no issue with image retention or burn in. The Sony gave of a more impressive picture to most people that came over, but to me especially after a professional ISF calibration, the Pioneer gives off a truer picture.

If you are looking for a punchy, vibrant image - go for an LCD; if you are looking for a natural looking image - for a plasma.


----------



## canaris

After much debate I bought myself a Panasonic G15-50 plasma and I am really happy with it... it's got the new pixel orbital technology to prevent burn in... I think these new panny plasmas come very close if not at par with the Kuros's in creating some stunning blacks.... the wow factor is very high... 

My panny pulls in anywhere from 280 to 360 watts depending on the colors displayed..which is as much as my old 55" RPTV..so I don't know why people fuss about the power consumption.. it's rather a moot point.. It's got four settings which include a THX and Vivid if you want things bright as a LCD....


----------



## lcaillo

What is new about pixel orbiting? It has never really been effective in reducing burn in because the patterns that burn in are larger than the orbit by quite a bit, usually.

Power consumption for some may not be insignificant. Many LCDs will run as much as 100 watts lower for your size pix. It may not seem like much to you, but others may find the difference important. Personally, I don't see any reason not to favor more efficient sets if all else is equal, and many of the newer LCD sets are quite reasonable in performance.

There are many factors that go into this decision, and many of them are matters of personal preference or priority. The technologies are close enough in performance that brand and model can make more difference than the technology. Frankly, I think the title of the thread poses a very outdated question.


----------



## tonyvdb

canaris said:


> My panny pulls in anywhere from 280 to 360 watts depending on the colors displayed..which is as much as my old 55" RPTV..so I don't know why people fuss about the power consumption.. it's rather a moot point.. It's got four settings which include a THX and Vivid if you want things bright as a LCD....


280-360watts! yikes thats enough to make me not want to buy a Plasma. And using the Vivid setting in any display regularly is going to kill it in a very big hurry.


----------



## canaris

Check out this link for a comparison of LCD and Plasma... there are some LCD's that are pretty high.. 

click here.


----------



## Jon Liu

In all honesty, I find television power consumption is a wash. After proper calibration, the actual power usage is a decent amount lower anyway.

I agree with lcaillo partially. Pixel orbiter is not new and I don't think it does _THAT_ much however I will slightly go a different route in saying that plasma technologies improved so much that burn-in is really a thing of the past. Pixel Orbiters are still somewhat useful for people like me that play a lot of video games, but as lcaillo said it's really not going to reduce burn-in as much as you would thing, if burn-in were really an issue.

The thing to remember for plasmas is just to be aware, especially during the first 100-200 hours of usage. If you are going to leave your TV on while you do something for more than 5-10 minutes, I would turn the screen off or turn on a screen saver. This will save the headache and worry about possible image retention. Otherwise, I would sit back and enjoy my new set!! As I said, I play video games a lot and games in general have LOTS of chances of having burn-in and in the year and a half I've had my Pioneer plasma, I've not experience one instance of it.

I might add, turning your TV off also is a recommendation for LCD users that might be worried about power consumption, too. It's a good idea not to leave the TV on for too long if it's not necessary.


----------



## lcaillo

Jon Liu said:


> ...plasma technologies improved so much that burn-in is really a thing of the past.


Jon, this is a dangerous overstatement. It is correct to say that burn-in is much less of a possible problem than in the past, but it is still very real and WILL occur if you leave the same pattern on a PDP continuously, especially at high contrast levels. I continue to see it in relatively new sets all the time. People who don't know any better, who buy from vendors who do not properly warn them, burn PDPs rather frequently. Just leave something with banners on constantly or do nothing but watch 4:3 sources with the set on vivid and see what happens.

Plasma is still a phosphor based system and as such will have aging. Differential aging of parts of the screen is what we call burn in. With a little awareness, a reasonable attempt at calibration, and varied viewing, it is completely preventable. With ignorance and or carelessness, however, it still happens. One of the downsides to the demise of specialty retailiers is the lack of customer education that can occur on matters like this one.


----------



## canaris

Plasma is not for everyone... if you have young kids that play a lot of games and so forth... get an lcd... On the other hand if you are a videophile then Plasma is for you...


----------



## lcaillo

Again, these generalizations are tough to justify. I have lots of clients that use their PDPs for games with no problems at all. OTOH, it is really hard to beat the picture of the best LCD sets. There are things to dislike about both technologies and things that they do exceptionally, if the set is a well executed example of the technology. There are very mediocre sets in both as well. I suggest comparing specific models rather than generalizing about the technologies. It is hard to beat the Panasonic PDPs for performance per size, but frankly, if I had a choice without consideration for cost, the Sony LCD sets are really hard to beat in picture performance.


----------



## Jon Liu

I do firmly believe that both technologies have their benefits and their market. I really enjoy seeing the quality on both, LCDs and PDPs, and seeing how they compare and as I said before, each type of image caters two different crowds.

I will now remain pretty dedicated in the PDP camp as the images they put out are more favorable to what I like, but I still won't hesitate to make an LCD recommendation, based on the individual's preferences.

canaris, that's not entirely true. I am a pretty avid gamer *and* a videophile and a plasma suits me just fine.


----------



## canaris

Guys...I said when you have "young' kids...


----------



## akan101

I also find a pretty good article for difference between Plasma and Lcd

http://hometheater.about.com/od/lcdtvfaqs/f/lcdfaq2.htm


----------



## recruit

After owning both I prefer the PQ that I get with the LCD over plasma, and with the new LED backlighting technology it is even better, HD material looks stunning...speaking to someone the other day and they are the complete opposite to me and prefer the plasma image quality and in particular motion and the way it is handled compared to LCD...

considering how the technology for both has moved on so much over the years it really is great time to invest as panels are so much cheaper now, looking forward to seeing some of the 3D units that are now being developed...


----------



## canaris

akan101 said:


> I also find a pretty good article for difference between Plasma and Lcd
> 
> http://hometheater.about.com/od/lcdtvfaqs/f/lcdfaq2.htm



That article has nothing positive to say about LCD in regards to picture quality... basically what I always thought anyway...


----------



## akan101

canaris said:


> Check out this link for a comparison of LCD and Plasma... there are some LCD's that are pretty high..
> 
> click here.


Thanks for the article. Its really helpful.


----------



## tbase1

PLASMA.


----------



## recruit

tbase1 said:


> PLASMA.


From the majority of people I speak to they do prefer Plasmas over LCD, I was having a good look at the Samsung LCD's with LED backlighting and PQ was superb, HD material tends to always look great on LCD panels but with SD not anywhere near as good, this is where plasma TV's are better, also on some LCD motion cannot be as good, but the technology is getting better


----------



## the_diyr

I hate to be a stick in the mud but My Hitachi RPTV 50 inch has a really good picture at 1080i .. My dad who is now 79 years old bought a 42inch Samsung , and I still believe my RPTV has a better picture.. Also I love the Auto Focus Feature on my RPTV.. Thats just me ... If I had to choose between LCD and Plasma I would Choose LCD... I am also intrested in the LED tv's


----------



## Drumzerbe

Does anyone have any experience with the Panasonic Viera TC-P65V10? Thanks.


----------



## akan101

Drumzerbe said:


> Does anyone have any experience with the Panasonic Viera TC-P65V10? Thanks.


Well you can check out one of my frnd review of Panasonic Viera TC-P65V10;

"I've been waiting for months for the 65 inch V10 to become available. Almost pre-ordered it online several times, but was leary of ordering before it was in stock. Happened into Best Buy on Fri Aug 21 and saw the 58" on display. Asked about the 65" and found out the store had just received one that day and intended to set it up for display the next day. After a short negotiation I had secured this first set for $3899 ($100 off MSRP) and had it delivered free on the following Tuesday. First thing I did after setting it up was to switch the picture setting from Vivid to THX and the picture was amazing. Flipped through a few channels and watched some dark scenes from shows on my DVR that I had been saving just for this purpose. The clarity in low light scenes better than I had imagined. I have played with the custom pro picture settings some, but haven't spent enough time to get it looking better than THX yet. I have enjoyed the Viera Cast features, especially the weather and YouTube. I was watching a movie on cable and started wondering what other movies had the same director. I paused the show, switched to YouTube and looked up the director's name and watched a few clips of him taling about the movie I was watching and a few others he had directed, then went back and watched the rest of the movie. It was nice to be able to do this without having to pull out my laptop. I was also impressed with the picture quality from YouTube, even when I put it on full screen (I don't think most YT videos are prepared to be displayed at 65", but it still looked pretty clear!) I haven't rented a movie from the Amazon download service yet, but I'll have to try it. I can't believe that the picture will equal BluRay though- which reminds me... For some reason it was nearly three days of watching this set before I remembered that I hadn't see a BluRay disk on it. I had been too caught up playing with the settings and Viera Cast and setting up my Harmony report (which is a little tricky to get set up for Viera Cast because I wanted the direction pad to control the DRV when watching cable and to control the TV when using VC, but I figured it out.) Anyway, I finally got around to putting in a BluRay disc and the picture went to a whole other level - like nothing I'd seen before. Going back to Comcast compressed 1080i HD signal after BluRay was like looking through a mist. Now I can't rent BR movies fast enough. I almost want to stop watching my favorite shows on TV and wait for the season to come out on BluRay.
Well, if you're still reading- I love this TV -I want to stop writing now, go close the shades and start watching. "


----------



## Vader

akan101 said:


> Well you can check out one of my frnd review of Panasonic Viera TC-P65V10;
> 
> "I've been waiting for months for the 65 inch V10 to become available. Almost pre-ordered it online several times, but was leary of ordering before it was in stock. Happened into Best Buy on Fri Aug 21 and saw the 58" on display. Asked about the 65" and found out the store had just received one that day and intended to set it up for display the next day. After a short negotiation I had secured this first set for $3899 ($100 off MSRP) and had it delivered free on the following Tuesday. First thing I did after setting it up was to switch the picture setting from Vivid to THX and the picture was amazing. Flipped through a few channels and watched some dark scenes from shows on my DVR that I had been saving just for this purpose. The clarity in low light scenes better than I had imagined. I have played with the custom pro picture settings some, but haven't spent enough time to get it looking better than THX yet. I have enjoyed the Viera Cast features, especially the weather and YouTube. I was watching a movie on cable and started wondering what other movies had the same director. I paused the show, switched to YouTube and looked up the director's name and watched a few clips of him taling about the movie I was watching and a few others he had directed, then went back and watched the rest of the movie. It was nice to be able to do this without having to pull out my laptop. I was also impressed with the picture quality from YouTube, even when I put it on full screen (I don't think most YT videos are prepared to be displayed at 65", but it still looked pretty clear!) I haven't rented a movie from the Amazon download service yet, but I'll have to try it. I can't believe that the picture will equal BluRay though- which reminds me... For some reason it was nearly three days of watching this set before I remembered that I hadn't see a BluRay disk on it. I had been too caught up playing with the settings and Viera Cast and setting up my Harmony report (which is a little tricky to get set up for Viera Cast because I wanted the direction pad to control the DRV when watching cable and to control the TV when using VC, but I figured it out.) Anyway, I finally got around to putting in a BluRay disc and the picture went to a whole other level - like nothing I'd seen before. Going back to Comcast compressed 1080i HD signal after BluRay was like looking through a mist. Now I can't rent BR movies fast enough. I almost want to stop watching my favorite shows on TV and wait for the season to come out on BluRay.
> Well, if you're still reading- I love this TV -I want to stop writing now, go close the shades and start watching. "


This is really good to hear, as my 65V10 was just delivered, after a disastrous attempt at mirror cleaning in my WS65511 RPTV (by yours truly...:doh. The biggest "problem" I face is the fact that the Panny/TV Stand combo is completely a completely different presence (size, open to air, etc), so this weekend I need to take a new FR map of the room and see if it was affected (It was pretty flat down to 17Hz). The other issue is breaking in the set. I don't really relish the thought of using the "zoom" on 2:35 films for the first 300 hours just to avoid IR of the black bars. Now I am just waiting for the HDMI cables to arrive from Blue Jeans Cable...


----------

