42" Plasma

There are no 1280x720,1280x768 or 1365x768 42" plasma's available.
(You need to go up to a 50" plasma for 1280x768 , 1365x768 , 1920x1080)


The HD 42" plasma's are 1024x768 they use non square pixels..

And there some like the Hitachi 42" plasma's with 1024 x 1080 , 1024 x 1024
 
Last edited:
Vegeta said:
No square pixels (doesnt sound good), that suggests to me lcd picture will look nicer?
Click to expand...
For heavy PC use a LCD would be much better...

Plasma are at there best for TV/movie use..
 
Last edited:
chaparral said:
Plasma are at there best for TV/movie use..
Click to expand...

Actually they really aren't anymore. A number of LCD panels in the 42" market and below have recently proven themselves to be as good as Plasmas and in some cases better.
 
Mr Footlong said:
Actually they really aren't anymore. A number of LCD panels in the 42" market and below have recently proven themselves to be as good as Plasmas and in some cases better.
Click to expand...

In paid for by manufactures magazines you mean ;)

Simple fact is LCD can never get black levels as good as the best plasmas as it has to have the backlight on. LCD's have certinally got vastly better and in a bright room can look very good. Response time and black levels are not as good as plasma and never will be.

I think they can happily live together, both have benefits over the other and its down to how the user wants to use the screen that will make one better than the other.
 
Well I am using a new 42" Bravia LCD (haven't owned it long enough to remember the model number lol!) as of last weekend along with a plasma at my folks that I gave them and a 65" RD65 DLP and I can tell you that for all but the most @n@l of us the black levels are truly excellent. I am well aware of backhanders going on but I buy based on how well they demo to me as well as taking the reviews with a pinch of salt. I even find the black levels on my TX26LXD60 in the bedroom to be very good. I am a fussy sod with AV like you I guess ;).

Cheers,

Nick.
 
i have to agree with the comments about plasma for tv/film/dvd viewing i have both and the plasma is quite abit ahead of lcd for film viewing ,although fired up with a 360 or the like lcd in my view is more crisper .
 
One of the new Samsung panels have an array of white LEDs behind the display that act as the backlight, so on black they can be totally switched off giving a very high contrast level. I don't know if any of the sony's have this technology yet.
 
pinkaardvark said:
One of the new Samsung panels have an array of white LEDs behind the display that act as the backlight, so on black they can be totally switched off giving a very high contrast level. I don't know if any of the sony's have this technology yet.
Click to expand...
It's not how black the blacks are on LCD vs plasma..It's more to do with how much more detail you get on a plasma compared to a LCD went watching dark movies like blade etc

It's no good just going to a TV retailer and looking which TV has the blackest blacks...You need to compare the detail on the dark night scenes...
 
Yes - its called crushing detail.

Even Pioneer Plasmas suffer from it, to get inky blanks you crush lots of detail, to get the detail back you get grey blacks. It affects the depth of image.

Hopefully SED will give us all what we want, High res + CRT blacks + No latency/smearing + Flat screen + sharp etc etc

I dont see it as its a bit of a tall order but my wallet is ready to pay fro it should it happen. Currently i find Plasma gives the most natural picture - i find LCDs can be a bit clinical with sharpness and colour, black levels are not great but vastly better than even a year ago. The Sony X is the nearest i have come to saying i would have an LCD but if i was given one free i would keep my plasma and sell the Sony as like most people i watch a wide variety of stuff and for 95% of the time its on the plasma does a better job IMO.

Having said that Sky HD + the 360 did look stunning on the Sony and its obviously the best screen around for mixed PC/TV useage. Amazing price for what it is also.
 
I am going from my RD65 to a 55" SXRD shortly, subject to me finding one in a good AV shop to demo for my media centre purposes. They can be picked up for very good prices. Not exactly as slender as Plasma or LCD but I prefer mine rear projection for the good stuff ;).
 
Shimmyhill said:
Yes - its called crushing detail.

Even Pioneer Plasmas suffer from it, to get inky blanks you crush lots of detail, to get the detail back you get grey blacks. It affects the depth of image.

Hopefully SED will give us all what we want, High res + CRT blacks + No latency/smearing + Flat screen + sharp etc etc

I dont see it as its a bit of a tall order but my wallet is ready to pay fro it should it happen. Currently i find Plasma gives the most natural picture - i find LCDs can be a bit clinical with sharpness and colour, black levels are not great but vastly better than even a year ago. The Sony X is the nearest i have come to saying i would have an LCD but if i was given one free i would keep my plasma and sell the Sony as like most people i watch a wide variety of stuff and for 95% of the time its on the plasma does a better job IMO.

Having said that Sky HD + the 360 did look stunning on the Sony and its obviously the best screen around for mixed PC/TV useage. Amazing price for what it is also.
Click to expand...


What's happening with SED? I seem to have been waiting aaaaages for this, but haven't heard much about it lately. I'm still holding on to my SD Panny PWD6 plasma which is still a cracking screen that still works well when fed a HD source. Getting tempted by the Sony LCD though, but SED looks to be the dogs (when\if it does arrive of course!)/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom