PDA

View Full Version : How did you choose your LCD or plasma TV?



FoxyMX
27-02-2010, 03:48 PM
Had a bit of time to kill between appointments whilst in town yesterday so went for a wander around Harvey Norman's TV department. It was rather overwhelming as they have at least three times as many TVs as the local mall's shops. To me the picture looked pretty similar on them all so I got to wondering just how people chose what TV to get.

Did you narrow your choice down to a brand and then pick a size and price? Or did you pick it for the features it had? Or was it the picture itself that sold you on what you got?

wainuitech
27-02-2010, 04:03 PM
It was a toss up between a 32" or 42" W LCD. One of my suppliers had 32" LCD TV's on special - so that made up my mind real quick :D

radium
27-02-2010, 05:03 PM
If you want Plasma go Panasonic, LCD then Sony or Samsung.

You could pick up a Sony KLV40S550A (Full HD) - However no motion flow. (still nice TV) pretty cheap... Say from $1000 on special.
Great Buy

Sonys New TVs are due out next Month, panasonic and Samsung won't be long after, New Models = Great stuff but they will be more expensive.

So now is the time to buy, if you want a cheap TV

Panasonis best buy, Probably a 42" Plasma THP42S10Z From $1599 (Full HD with 550Hz Subfeild Drive)-Smooths out the picture.

LCDs don't reflect the glare as much as Plasma, but pasmas are are good if you want a Big cheap tv, they also do a good job of keeping up with the picture - an inherent problem in LCD and somewhat Plasma to a smaller degree as well.

Plasmas are also more forgiving to a Standard Definition broadcast, where as LCD like an HD input to perform. IMHO

If you want a big cheap flat screen then choose a Plasma, If you to pay a little more get a good LCD with Motion flow (100Hz scanning)

Metla
27-02-2010, 05:12 PM
Price.

Damn cheap at Normon Ross.

Brand

Panasonic was recommended by many as the best of teh low end Plasma's.

Picture Quality

All three 50" Plasma's they had in my price range were lined up on the wall, after watching all of them for an hour and a half decided I could see zero difference in picture quality so asked for the Panasonic...

...Only to be told that was the last one and it was a ten day wait, Screw that said I, The crap is going to hit the fan when the wife finds out, damned if I want to spend ten days in-between spending the money and getting the TV knowing its going to end badly, So I went for the LG as that was the only one they had in stock.

Then I raced home, set it up in the lounge and as the wife came home I sat back in the lounge and pretended I had done nothing.


Funny enough the fireworks are still going about my wasting of money on a ridicules TV we didn't need and can't afford.

Lmfao.

lakewoodlady
27-02-2010, 05:29 PM
Shiny Samsung 32" LCD looked cool and it was on a special for $1149 2 years ago. So price was a factor. I understand they have come down in price now, bummer.......

LL

pcuser42
27-02-2010, 05:43 PM
Our TV was purchased by size (anything bigger than 22" wouldn't fit :(), price and features (Freeview HD built in).

plod
27-02-2010, 05:51 PM
Our TV was purchased by size (anything bigger than 22" wouldn't fit :(), price and features (Freeview HD built in).

small bathroom?

robbyp
27-02-2010, 05:52 PM
The new models of Sony LCD apparently don't have dlna, unless you go for an LED high priced one. However many of the current non LED models do have it, so it may be worth trying to get one of the older models if you want dlna

ryanjames.powell
27-02-2010, 06:08 PM
Skin tones look noticibly more realistic on a Plasma (or did at the time - LCDs have made some progress and I don't know how they compare now). Nothing bigger than 37" would fit in our TV cabinet, so there was only one choice - a Panasonic as they were the only ones who made a 37" Plasma (only one model too).

Nomad
27-02-2010, 06:27 PM
Don't have a thin TV yet b/c our CRT is still going. We also don't have HD channels. We would need to add the UHF thing or we would need to get Sky HD, we only have the foreign channels off Sky but not the Sky channels, however they are not HD.

My own computer LCD. I got suggestions from other photographers, so I got a 24" Dell Ultrasharp. Although some others would suggest me to get a Eizo retailing at $4,000+ :D I in fact have seen them at a photography store and did ponder about getting one :p

I got the Dell when they had a online special.

But PS: I am not a TV person.

Cicero
27-02-2010, 06:39 PM
I was told by someone who I thought knew,that LCD was the way of the future,anyway I believed him and now have a 32" Sony.

Sweep
27-02-2010, 07:06 PM
What's a plasma or LCD TV?

R2x1
27-02-2010, 07:10 PM
I chose mine by lot; they wanted a lot of $$ so I chose not to get one.

KenESmith
27-02-2010, 07:13 PM
Bought a Sony Bravia 40in LCD with 100hz motion flow - Brilliant set.

Why? it was on special at AUD1900 and they threw in a Sony Blue Ray/DVD player; and it came with 3 years manufacturer's warranty against 1 year which is fairly standard in oz. I bought a further 4 years extended warranty for AUD130, which gives the set 7 years warranty - so it will probably see me out.

My short list was either Samsung or Sony for LCD - the panels come out of the same factory and are amongst the best available.

robbyp
27-02-2010, 07:25 PM
Bought a Sony Bravia 40in LCD with 100hz motion flow - Brilliant set.

Why? it was on special at AUD1900 and they threw in a Sony Blue Ray/DVD player; and it came with 3 years manufacturer's warranty against 1 year which is fairly standard in oz. I bought a further 4 years extended warranty for AUD130, which gives the set 7 years warranty - so it will probably see me out.

My short list was either Samsung or Sony for LCD - the panels come out of the same factory and are amongst the best available.

In NZ you dn't need to pay extra for extended warrenties, as it is covered by the CGA, which offers more protecting then the consumer laws on Oz. You only need the extended warrenty for business useage. I compared a motionflow against one without it, and couldn't see any difference, so I personally wouldn't spend the extra, unless it is a similar price.

pcuser42
27-02-2010, 07:36 PM
small bathroom?

Small cabinet in the "office".

Metla
27-02-2010, 08:09 PM
Small cabinet in the "office".

I was thinking you may live in a sleeping bag....

nofam
27-02-2010, 10:15 PM
Another factor that no-one has mentioned so far is running cost; plasma sets cost considerably more than LCD's (side-lit LED are cheaper again) to run, and are a lot heavier too, which may be a consideration for some. I recommend plasma for people who watch a lot of sports, as they give you more bang for your buck than the 100mhz LCD's (that is changing now though).

It's also worth noting that full 1080p on a 32" set is pretty much indiscernible from 720p/1080i, so full HD isn't really a concern until you get into the 42"+ range.

Also, don't get upsold to a screen that's bigger than you need - watching a 52" screen from a few feet away isn't pretty. Work our the optimal size for your room/viewing distance and go with that. Goes without saying that being stingy and getting one too small is a bad thing too! :)

wmoore
27-02-2010, 11:34 PM
Another factor that no-one has mentioned so far is running cost; plasma sets cost considerably more than LCD's (side-lit LED are cheaper again) to run, and are a lot heavier too, which may be a consideration for some. I recommend plasma for people who watch a lot of sports, as they give you more bang for your buck than the 100mhz LCD's (that is changing now though).

It's also worth noting that full 1080p on a 32" set is pretty much indiscernible from 720p/1080i, so full HD isn't really a concern until you get into the 42"+ range.

Also, don't get upsold to a screen that's bigger than you need - watching a 52" screen from a few feet away isn't pretty. Work our the optimal size for your room/viewing distance and go with that. Goes without saying that being stingy and getting one too small is a bad thing too! :)

Just a note on the power usage, There is not much difference in it now as
plasmas are becoming more 'Green'.

GoodHour
28-02-2010, 12:01 AM
Don't have a thin TV yet b/c our CRT is still going. We also don't have HD channels. We would need to add the UHF thing or we would need to get Sky HD, we only have the foreign channels off Sky but not the Sky channels, however they are not HD.
Tell us what model of television you have and we'll be able to tell you whether it can do high definition.

robbyp
28-02-2010, 12:13 AM
It's also worth noting that full 1080p on a 32" set is pretty much indiscernible from 720p/1080i, so full HD isn't really a concern until you get into the 42"+ range.

That is true to a point, however if you watch the TV from a couple of metres from the screen where you can take in the extra detail, you can definitely see a difference. I can see the difference between TVNZs HD (720p) and TV3s HD(Which is 1080)

pcuser42
28-02-2010, 08:17 AM
That is true to a point, however if you watch the TV from a couple of metres from the screen where you can take in the extra detail, you can definitely see a difference. I can see the difference between TVNZs HD (720p) and TV3s HD(Which is 1080)

Just remember that TV3 is using 1080i (interlaced): due to the nature of interlacing you're only getting 540 vertical lines. ;)

pctek
28-02-2010, 09:03 AM
Did you narrow your choice down to a brand and then pick a size and price?

Needed one, went into HN because they were still open and having a sale. I'd looked at what was cheap earlier via online.

Had to be Sony or Panasonic. Samsung is supposed to be good but I have a perhaps unreasoned aversion to them for a couple of reasons.

Found the cheapest they had (without resorting to cheap and nasty stuff), and it was therefore a 32" Sony, non-HD.

Zippity
28-02-2010, 09:17 AM
Carefully :)

Trev
28-02-2010, 09:31 AM
I have had a 40" Sony Bravia LCD TV for 2 years and are very pleased with it. Mine dosen't have motion blur and don't see any need for it. I do watch alot of fast action stuff. As for colours they say Plasma produce more vibrant colours and blacker blacks, but the colours on my set are vibrant and the blacks are black. The reason I bought the Sony was that I like Sony products and the Sony 29" Trinitron CRT I had had for 10 years went flawlessly and still is going strong today. Also I got a free portable DVD player with it valued at $350. A year previous to buying my TV, the model I bought was selling for about $5000. I paid $2400.
:)

FoxyMX
28-02-2010, 09:54 AM
I still haven't learnt that looking at stuff that I had no intention of buying never ends well. Now I'm in big trouble. The old 29" CRT bought for an arm and a leg back in the Ark days is really starting to annoy me with its faulty sound and bad habit of chopping off half the picture on wide-screen movies now that I've had a wee taste of these bigger beasts. :p

A certain person has a birthday coming up soon. I'm sure he would just love to be surprised with a nice big 40" (or 42") LCD TV. ;) :D :D

I should probably do a bit of a crash course in LCD TVs (don't need plasma) but going from what you people have said I'm not sure that is really necessary. Seems like I can't really go wrong just going and picking the one I like the look of best, providing it is one of the top brands.

One thing I did think would be handy is a USB port to plug in a memory stick full of photos but only Samsung and LG appear to have them. Others have a card reader but that's not as convenient as a USB stick.

The DLNA that robbyp mentions is something that I haven't heard of. How easy/difficult would it be to view photos from the PC using it?

Battleneter2
28-02-2010, 10:09 AM
Another factor that no-one has mentioned so far is running cost; plasma sets cost considerably more than LCD's (side-lit LED are cheaper again) to run, and are a lot heavier too, which may be a consideration for some. I recommend plasma for people who watch a lot of sports, as they give you more bang for your buck than the 100mhz LCD's (that is changing now though).



Considering the advantages with true colour and zero lag, I say pay the extra maybe $60 a year running costs for Plasma if I use it like 6hrs a day. As stated Plasma are more green but they are still up to 33% more exspenve to run but that completely depends on your screen brightness unlike LCD.

One VERY important point often missed in these discussions is how well TV's up scale poor source, some manufactures do it a lot better than others, most of the material most of us watch is not blue ray 1080P its like freeview.

Plasma for the Living room and LCD for bedrooms where picture quality is a little less important, some people cant see motion blur or poor black etc and are happy with LCD, others like me see it a mile away.

Jen
28-02-2010, 10:16 AM
I too have been passing time in the TV section of a few shops. :eek:

What about the LED LCDs? Would people say the LED LCD screen produces a better quality image than the plasmas? As with all new technology, the LED LCDs are still $$, so I wasn't sure if I should just wait for them to come down in price, or get a standard LCD (or plasma) now.

Trev
28-02-2010, 10:36 AM
The Samsung LED TV is really a LCD TV. The only difference between it and a ordinary LCD TV is that it uses LEDs to produce the back lite where the rest use florescent tubes to light the pixels you see on the screen.

Consumer say quote, We found that while it provides decent picture quality, it still has some short comings that make the $3999 price tag hard to swallow. Unquote.

:)

Battleneter2
28-02-2010, 10:40 AM
LED is still a from of LCD with a backlight with still largely the same disadvantages. They physically look awesome imo with the $$ tag. Picture quality definitely Plasma still have it. I should have also mentioned LCD is a lot better for consoles.

robsonde
28-02-2010, 11:03 AM
Had a bit of time to kill between appointments whilst in town yesterday so went for a wander around Harvey Norman's TV department. It was rather overwhelming as they have at least three times as many TVs as the local mall's shops. To me the picture looked pretty similar on them all so I got to wondering just how people chose what TV to get.

Did you narrow your choice down to a brand and then pick a size and price? Or did you pick it for the features it had? Or was it the picture itself that sold you on what you got?


1. decide on the top price you can afford, or justify to wife.
put this number aside, don't think about it again till the end.

2. decide between LCD and plasma.
LCD is often cheaper and better in "un-controlled" lighting.
plasma will give blacker blacks and brighter brights, but needs controlled lighting.
* LED back-lit gives best of both world but at a very high price.

3. select size, 40" or 42" is what most people go for, you need a very big room for a 50".

4. decide if you want / need 1080P or will you be happy with 720i
I would strongly recommend full 1080P, this is where most HD content is being made. but 1080P will cost more than 720i.

5 select brand, this often comes down to personal choice and price.
5.1 ask to see the remote control, usability of the remote is a big factor.
5.2 check number of inputs, some have lots of HDMI and few AV inputs.
some have good number of AV inputs and few HDMI's.
it depends on what you are going to have as inputs.
5.3 ask to play your own content, get them to play a movie you know very well.

6. at this stage you should have it down to only one or two.
at this point it often comes down to price.

7. cut a deal with the shop, most shops will give as much as 10% discount if you push them a but.

8. are you under the price from step 1???
if not then repeat from step 2.

9. always ask for free delivery right at the end.




the main factors in image quality are:
LCD vs Plasma.
quality of source (VHS or blue-ray).
1080P vs 720i
brand makes very little difference compared to the three factor above.



as for me, I got the 50" Samsung plasma, series5 , full 1080P. ($2900)
had to re-design to room layout to make it fit, but very happy.



.

FoxyMX
28-02-2010, 04:32 PM
Sonys New TVs are due out next Month, panasonic and Samsung won't be long after, New Models = Great stuff but they will be more expensive.

Do you know what new features they will have or how they will be different to the current models?




I too have been passing time in the TV section of a few shops. :eek:

It's hard not to, isn't it? :p




What about the LED LCDs? Would people say the LED LCD screen produces a better quality image than the plasmas? As with all new technology, the LED LCDs are still $$, so I wasn't sure if I should just wait for them to come down in price, or get a standard LCD (or plasma) now.

I wouldn't wait. As I was looking around I noticed them because they are so Twiggy-like but other than that I couldn't really see any difference in the picture (American football :yuck:) they were displaying compared to the LCDs and plasmas around them.

Metla
28-02-2010, 04:36 PM
TV's are like computer hardware, There is always a "top end" model for 3 times the price of the mid range items and a new better range is always coming soon.

pctek
28-02-2010, 05:44 PM
What about the LED? .

Wait for the real ones.

robbyp
28-02-2010, 10:38 PM
Do you know what new features they will have or how they will be different to the current models?




As per my previous post, I have the new catalogue, and the lower priced non LED models have less features than the current models. eg. the new non LED ones don't have DLNA, while many of the current non led models do have it. Therefore to get DLNA on the new models, you will need to spend more and buy an LED one.

Cicero
28-02-2010, 10:55 PM
After all that,I don't think fox wants a new telly,she is just interested in what is going on in the telly world,indeed an on going saga.

Battleneter2
01-03-2010, 08:30 AM
2. decide between LCD and plasma.
LCD is often cheaper and better in "un-controlled" lighting.
plasma will give blacker blacks and brighter brights, but needs controlled lighting.
* LED back-lit gives best of both world but at a very high price.


.

To clarify you dont need "controlled" light to run plasma", in a very light room Plasma may reflect more depending where your windows are with angles etc. Plasma will be good for most rooms without modification.

Plasma is often cheaper!, esp the larger you get, but it prob chops and changes a bit to be fair.

LED does not have the best of both worlds sounds like something a sales guy would say in a shop. Still suffers lag like all LCD and the colors are still not considered truly natural, color is a little better than standard LCD sure, but really they exists for there physical looks.

Trev
01-03-2010, 11:56 AM
Check this out. LCD versus Plasma.Click Here (http://www.avalon.co.nz/default,668,plasma-vs-lcd.sm)

R2x1
01-03-2010, 12:07 PM
Sorry Trev, that link seems to be a bit outdated. Maybe my broadband is a bit slow today?

Battleneter2
01-03-2010, 03:41 PM
Any article much over a year old is not worth watching or reading as the tech is changing so fast.

Cnet video is not bad for Plasma vs LCD late 2009.

http://www.cnet.com.au/plasma-vs-lcd-which-is-right-for-you-240036500.htm?omnRef=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co.nz %2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dlcd%2Bvc%2Bplasma%2B2010%26ie%3Dut f-8%26oe%3Dutf-8%26aq%3Dt%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial%26client%3Dfirefox-a

Oh lastly Plasma sounds better " I have a Plasma " oooow , "I have a LCD" sounds apologetic :)

R2x1
01-03-2010, 04:18 PM
"I have an LCD" sounds a bit better.
When you say you're getting plasma, many folk say they "thought you were looking a bit pasty", then send grapes.

FoxyMX
01-03-2010, 04:49 PM
After all that,I don't think fox wants a new telly,she is just interested in what is going on in the telly world,indeed an on going saga.

I think you need to have your mind reading skills repaired. They appear to be broken.

Gobe1
01-03-2010, 05:00 PM
Was right price at the right time for me, wanted 42 but 40 was on special and real cheap at the time. Now want a 50 or bigger :( but ive had 10 inches of fun since then :)

plod
01-03-2010, 05:07 PM
( but ive had 10 inches of fun since then :)

Spend a lot of special time with male friends?

Cicero
01-03-2010, 06:22 PM
I think you need to have your mind reading skills repaired. They appear to be broken.

Had a bit of time to kill between appointments whilst in town yesterday so went for a wander around Harvey Norman's TV department. It was rather overwhelming as they have at least three times as many TVs as the local mall's shops. To me the picture looked pretty similar on them all so I got to wondering just how people chose what TV to get. That says you were having a wander,no mention of buying!

Battleneter2
01-03-2010, 07:00 PM
Had a bit of time to kill between appointments whilst in town yesterday so went for a wander around Harvey Norman's TV department. It was rather overwhelming as they have at least three times as many TVs as the local mall's shops. To me the picture looked pretty similar on them all so I got to wondering just how people chose what TV to get. That says you were having a wander,no mention of buying!

Dont allow them to play you a cartoon movie like Nemo its a cheap trick. Take your own media in to play. Also you cant assume they have set any TV and some factory default settings look better than others so you may have to have a play yourself with the top contenders. Plenty of reviews online so get the model numbers of the ones in your price range, go home and google.

Jen
21-03-2010, 01:46 PM
Ok, I've been back into the shops. :eek:

How much weighting would you give a 100Hz over a 50Hz screen? I'm not really into fast action sports, so is the difference worthwhile/noticeable/good to have for future proofing?

I'm basically looking at either a 37" or 40" full HD LCD TV. I've gone away from the LED because they are only edge-lid (not backlit or coloured LEDs), so apart from the power saving (or thinness) I can't see any advantage at this stage.

plod
21-03-2010, 02:17 PM
definitely go for the 100HZ, they have been out a while and will be passed by 200HZ. 50HZ is too old now. I'm sure NZ is a dumping ground for old stock

johcar
21-03-2010, 02:24 PM
I took the advice of a mate in the business (this link (http://pressf1.co.nz/showthread.php?t=106589) - post #3) who advised me to go for the Panasonic Plasma. Haven't regretted it.

Phil went to the launch of the Samsung LEDs and came away still firmly convinced to stay with Panasonic. He has three 50 inch plasmas in his shop for demo-ing his audio-visual products/services. If there was something better, he would have bought that for the shop. Why demo your (high-end) product/service on inferior machines....

He also has a Panasonic plasma at home... (He is not a Panasonic agent BTW)

Strommer
21-03-2010, 03:03 PM
Ok, I've been back into the shops. :eek:

How much weighting would you give a 100Hz over a 50Hz screen? I'm not really into fast action sports, so is the difference worthwhile/noticeable/good to have for future proofing?

I'm basically looking at either a 37" or 40" full HD LCD TV. I've gone away from the LED because they are only edge-lid (not backlit or coloured LEDs), so apart from the power saving (or thinness) I can't see any advantage at this stage.

100 Hz or higher is a good idea for LCD's. It only makes sense to settle for 50 Hz if you are on a very tight budget. However to be fair, most people would not notice the limitations of 50 Hz; many times in shops I compared 50 Hz with 100 and 200 Hz as well as plasma screens and could not tell any difference except for the credits (text) at the end of a film, and sometimes when the camera panned across a scene.

9 out of 10 times I can pick out the LCD's from the plasma's from the other end of a shop. LCD's - to me - appear more vivid, clear, whereas plasma's look washed out and grayish. But if you have a plasma as the only screen in a room, such as at home, it will look great because there is nothing to compare it to. The main disadvantage with plasma's is the reflection from windows and lights in the viewing room; some people don't mind but for me it would be irritating.

Trev
21-03-2010, 04:43 PM
Go for whatever suits you. They both have there good and bad points. I have a LCD TV but would be happy with a Plasma.
:)

wmoore
22-03-2010, 05:55 AM
100 Hz or higher is a good idea for LCD's. It only makes sense to settle for 50 Hz if you are on a very tight budget. However to be fair, most people would not notice the limitations of 50 Hz; many times in shops I compared 50 Hz with 100 and 200 Hz as well as plasma screens and could not tell any difference except for the credits (text) at the end of a film, and sometimes when the camera panned across a scene.

9 out of 10 times I can pick out the LCD's from the plasma's from the other end of a shop. LCD's - to me - appear more vivid, clear, whereas plasma's look washed out and grayish. But if you have a plasma as the only screen in a room, such as at home, it will look great because there is nothing to compare it to. The main disadvantage with plasma's is the reflection from windows and lights in the viewing room; some people don't mind but for me it would be irritating.

That is why people get sucked into buying a LCD, because it's brighter and shouts LOOK AT ME! A bit like the office party drunk, entertaining at first but gets annoying after a while. A correctly set up (ISF) Plasma will be better than an LCD. (In my humble opinion of course)
I can't stand the in your face look of the LCDs
Plasma for me.

Cicero
22-03-2010, 08:13 AM
It's like everything,there are always two schools of thought and never the twain shall meet.

I have an LCD my sister has a Plasma,we both think we have the best,one of us wrong!

Trev
22-03-2010, 08:27 AM
So! if you want a Plasma go for it and if you want a LCD go for it. You will be happy with either. Another thing, the style of the frame if you call it that it is in has a bearing. I didn't like the glossy looks of the Samsung.
:)

Cicero
22-03-2010, 08:32 AM
So! if you want a Plasma go for it and if you want a LCD go for it. You will be happy with either. Another thing, the style of the frame if you call it that it is in has a bearing. I didn't like the glossy looks of the Samsung.
:)

What do you think she should buy Trev?

Trev
22-03-2010, 08:53 AM
Whatever takes her fancy or she can decide Here. (http://www.google.co.nz/#hl=en&source=hp&q=lcd+vs+plasma+tv&meta=&aq=8&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=lcd+&gs_rfai=&fp=399bc65e021fc1c)
:)

Cicero
22-03-2010, 08:56 AM
:illogical
Whatever takes her fancy.
:)

Yes but which is the best I wonder?

Trev
22-03-2010, 09:01 AM
I edited my post.
:)

prefect
22-03-2010, 10:10 AM
I bought LCD for one reason and that was they use less power.
I am really interested in splitting hairs about piccy quality I dont watch any sport on tv so the frequency is a non issue. Normally just try and catch the news on 3 at 1800 hrs so black and white would be ok.

Cicero
22-03-2010, 12:01 PM
I edited my post.
:)

I know I know,some decisions are hard to make!

Battleneter2
22-03-2010, 01:31 PM
I bought LCD for one reason and that was they use less power.
I am really interested in splitting hairs about piccy quality I dont watch any sport on tv so the frequency is a non issue. Normally just try and catch the news on 3 at 1800 hrs so black and white would be ok.

Tree hugger :p, we are not talking huge amounts of energy difference between the two these days. Around $5 a month more to run a Plasma for the average family 6hrs a day. Sure if you are a business running 20 screens etc that can really start to have a impact.

There is no splitting hairs, Plasma has a tangible better image, but LCD's are not "that" far behind. As I say to people, Plasma for the living room where it matters (unless you plan to use a game console frequently) and LCD's for the bedroom.

omg!! post 666

utopian201
22-03-2010, 01:36 PM
I chose my one (Sony 40" WD4500, an older one) because it had in an integrated freeview tuner and was the cheapest one with frame interpolation (some people don't notice its effect, others notice it and dont like it, but I like it).

robbyp
22-03-2010, 03:13 PM
If you want Plasma go Panasonic, LCD then Sony or Samsung.

You could pick up a Sony KLV40S550A (Full HD) - However no motion flow. (still nice TV) pretty cheap... Say from $1000 on special.
Great Buy

Sonys New TVs are due out next Month, panasonic and Samsung won't be long after, New Models = Great stuff but they will be more expensive.

So now is the time to buy, if you want a cheap TV

Panasonis best buy, Probably a 42" Plasma THP42S10Z From $1599 (Full HD with 550Hz Subfeild Drive)-Smooths out the picture.

LCDs don't reflect the glare as much as Plasma, but pasmas are are good if you want a Big cheap tv, they also do a good job of keeping up with the picture - an inherent problem in LCD and somewhat Plasma to a smaller degree as well.

Plasmas are also more forgiving to a Standard Definition broadcast, where as LCD like an HD input to perform. IMHO

If you want a big cheap flat screen then choose a Plasma, If you to pay a little more get a good LCD with Motion flow (100Hz scanning)

Apparently that motion flow thing is a bit of a con, and I noticed no difference myself, even when watching sports. This article backs that up at http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/blogs/connector/3448534/100Hz-LCDs-are-they-worth-it

robbyp
22-03-2010, 03:16 PM
If you can, get one of the older sony 32 or 40 inchers with freeview, as they can be networked to your computer. The new model that has just been released doesn't have that feature, unless you buy the LED side lit versions, which are expensive. The new versions also look quite cheap and plasticy.
I got mine on special on boxing day for just $777, but next year I am sure the price would have dropped, but that is technology.

Trev
22-03-2010, 03:37 PM
Apparently that motion flow thing is a bit of a con, and I noticed no difference myself, even when watching sports. This article backs that up at http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/blogs/connector/3448534/100Hz-LCDs-are-they-worth-it
I quite agree. I have a Sony KLV-40V300A (model before freeview tuner) which I have had for 2 years and watch alot of motor racing and Sci Fi programs where they fire laser guns etc and don't see any problems.
:)

utopian201
22-03-2010, 04:20 PM
Apparently that motion flow thing is a bit of a con, and I noticed no difference myself, even when watching sports. This article backs that up at http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/blogs/connector/3448534/100Hz-LCDs-are-they-worth-it

I wouldn't say it is a con...
My parents don't notice it, but I do.
The effect also depends a lot on what is being shown. I don't know if sports would be the best way to showcase the interpolation. Cartoons and animations benefit from it a lot though.

Another disadvantage is that if it doesn't know how to calculate the difference between two frames, the inserted (calculated) frame can appear blocky. This is most noticeable when a car is driving behind a white picket fence for example; the spaces between the fence will be blocky and lag slightly behind the image.

Metla
22-03-2010, 04:21 PM
Decide on your budget, Buy the best that fits in that budget.

Pretty damn simple really.

I saw plenty of stunning LCD and Plasma's when I was looking, But in my price bracket the Plasma was king.

Having said that, If my budget was twice what I spent, I still would have bought the exact same television and left the rest of the money in the bank.

Jen
22-03-2010, 06:46 PM
The whole plasma vs LCD was Foxy's question, I just rode on her coattails and snuck my question in on her thread. :p


Apparently that motion flow thing is a bit of a con, and I noticed no difference myself, even when watching sports. This article backs that up at http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/blogs/connector/3448534/100Hz-LCDs-are-they-worth-itThat is interesting. I made a shortlist of a couple of suitable 40" 100 Hz, now I think I will go back and look at the 50 Hz instead. Sigh. Probably will be a Samsung or a Sony. The wireless network DLNA looked nice ... :nerd:

Trev
22-03-2010, 07:09 PM
Going LCD or Plasma is a bit like going Intel or Amd, Nvidia ATI etc.
:)

robbyp
22-03-2010, 11:08 PM
I wouldn't say it is a con...
My parents don't notice it, but I do.
The effect also depends a lot on what is being shown. I don't know if sports would be the best way to showcase the interpolation. Cartoons and animations benefit from it a lot though.

Another disadvantage is that if it doesn't know how to calculate the difference between two frames, the inserted (calculated) frame can appear blocky. This is most noticeable when a car is driving behind a white picket fence for example; the spaces between the fence will be blocky and lag slightly behind the image.

I am sure it does have its usage and benefits, but for normal TV viewing, I am not sure if the average user would notice and is it worth the extra money. Also I have heard of people who do have it, actually end up disabling the motionflow effect, becuase they don't like the effect.

When I got my TV, the 100HZ version was $400 more, than the $777 I paid.

robbyp
22-03-2010, 11:19 PM
The whole plasma vs LCD was Foxy's question, I just rode on her coattails and snuck my question in on her thread. :p

That is interesting. I made a shortlist of a couple of suitable 40" 100 Hz, now I think I will go back and look at the 50 Hz instead. Sigh. Probably will be a Samsung or a Sony. The wireless network DLNA looked nice ... :nerd:

Sonys wired DLNA works well, and it has the cool X Bar interface which I like.
This one I think has DLNA. It is the previous model, but the current equivalent model doesn't appear to have it
I am not a samsung lover, as everything I have purchased made by samsung as had some sort of fault, including a faulty LCD monitor. I prefer sony for TVs.

R2x1
22-03-2010, 11:39 PM
"Re: How did you choose your LCD or plasma TV?"

Well, first I am thinking of buying a Lotto ticket, then we shall see.

rob_on_guitar
22-03-2010, 11:39 PM
I chose my LG purely because of three things: Inputs, size and the most important, picture.
I heard plasma was too harsh on the power bill...
I had to get a specific size so that was real important, but I wanted the pc connection (RGB i think its called?) and sharpness, although that was what I like, I notice picture wise peeps have their own taste

robbyp
23-03-2010, 04:15 PM
I chose my LG purely because of three things: Inputs, size and the most important, picture.
I heard plasma was too harsh on the power bill...
I had to get a specific size so that was real important, but I wanted the pc connection (RGB i think its called?) and sharpness, although that was what I like, I notice picture wise peeps have their own taste

LG gets a good rating by consumer in this months mag.
So does the older version Sony, they didn't however review the current version.Don't LG and philips use the same panels and factory as I think they are owned by the same company.

Cicero
23-03-2010, 06:19 PM
Mate just bought a 50" Plasma,$3800.
I aked him where his your USB port was, so that he could watch a flilm I have on a USB drive,oh he said,I will give them a ring,on doing so he was told Plasmas don't have them,he rang back 5 mins later to say that Samsung Plasma was the only one to have a USB slot,can you believe it.?

prefect
23-03-2010, 06:26 PM
Unbelievable every modern device even cars should be chocka full of usb slots.
There should be usb slots for Africa

Cicero
23-03-2010, 06:31 PM
Unbelievable every modern device even cars should be chocka full of usb slots.
There should be usb slots for Africa

Mate,funny you should say that,my car has a USB slot.

Clearly you think we would be better off without such useful tools,are you a member of the Luddites?

prefect
23-03-2010, 06:35 PM
I think I am the opposite of Ludditety, I believe in machines doing the work for you so you can spend more time down at pub.

Cicero
23-03-2010, 08:10 PM
I think I am the opposite of Ludditety, I believe in machines doing the work for you so you can spend more time down at pub.

And yet you decry the use of a USB drive,which is a machine,you twit.

prefect
23-03-2010, 08:22 PM
Unbelievable every modern device even cars should be chocka full of usb slots.

Chocka full is kiwi for lots, so please read lots of usb slots.

Cicero
23-03-2010, 10:23 PM
Unbelievable every modern device even cars should be chocka full of usb slots.

Chocka full is kiwi for lots, so please read lots of usb slots.

Mate I have been in NZ longer than you,so don't tell me what Choka means.

We are saying that USB slots should be in the right place at the right time.

You must be Dutch?

Peter H
24-03-2010, 12:03 PM
Does no-one ever listen to the sound on these modern TV's? My cellphone sounds better.

Metla
24-03-2010, 12:07 PM
I was surprised by how poor the audio of my TV is, Well below an acceptable level.

Granted I was always going to bypass the TV speakers and the audio goes via an amp to a set of speakers (and sounds stunning) but its still a letdown.

I know someone who paid many thousands for their TV so I checked out their audio, It was better but still imo sub-standard.

Cicero
24-03-2010, 01:56 PM
Ya,there is a tendency to go on about the picture,with no mention of sound.
I wonder if anybody on here as been sold a TV on sound quality?

Metla
24-03-2010, 02:05 PM
My last TV had audio so damn fine that when it broke (display failed) I gave it to a mate and he used it as a stereo.

Cicero
24-03-2010, 02:22 PM
My last TV had audio so damn fine that when it broke (display failed) I gave it to a mate and he used it as a stereo.

Just so,but can we say that with the modern TV,it would seem not!

prefect
24-03-2010, 02:28 PM
Can ya run the audio output thru your home entertainment unit amp?

Metla
24-03-2010, 02:31 PM
Can ya run the audio output thru your home entertainment unit amp?

My current TV has an optical output from the TV to the amp.

Peter H
25-03-2010, 03:01 PM
I use an external amp and speakers for some programs, but it is a nuisance that the TV mute control and volume then have no effect. The missus is pressing the normal buttons, and complains that they don't work. Not too techno savvy. I am still using a tube TV - JVC - with listenable audio. Sent a Philips one back after 1 day because the sound was lousy. Consumers last test slated the sound on every model. All were unacceptable. Hopefully by the time I need a new one, they will have some decent sounding models.:rolleyes:

Trev
25-03-2010, 03:38 PM
When watching TV I use the TV speakers, but when watching DVDs I have the sound going through a stereo.
:)

robbyp
25-03-2010, 04:43 PM
I use an external amp and speakers for some programs, but it is a nuisance that the TV mute control and volume then have no effect. The missus is pressing the normal buttons, and complains that they don't work. Not too techno savvy. I am still using a tube TV - JVC - with listenable audio. Sent a Philips one back after 1 day because the sound was lousy. Consumers last test slated the sound on every model. All were unacceptable. Hopefully by the time I need a new one, they will have some decent sounding models.:rolleyes:

The sony one, you are able to disable the TV speakers, so the controls will work with your external speakers.

Jen
25-03-2010, 08:35 PM
Well I did it. I am now the owner of a Samsung LA40B650 LCD 40" TV. It is a bit more expensive than the original model I was looking at, but I was offered a very good deal and somehow ended up buying that instead. :illogical

Anyhoo, it has Wireless DLNA and a 100 Hz screen (I could see the difference in the shop), so yeah. :p

Thanks for everyone's comments (and Foxy for me hijacking her thread!).

Laura
25-03-2010, 09:33 PM
Great that you took the plunge, Jen.

And even better that you're happy with the end result.
I've learned a lot from this thread myself, even though it'll be a while before I can upgrade my TV (and no doubt the electronics world will have changed again by then. But I know where to get advice...)