How long before Plasma RIP ?

How old is it? 7th generation panels and earlier don't hold a candle to more recent offerings.
 
Stag said:
Depends how old it is. About 3+ years ago the black levels took a massive leap forward which make quite a difference.
Click to expand...

its panasonic 42phd8, i got it second hand during xmas time 2007 not a proper 1080p panel its was meant to be stop gap till i got me self a 50+ inch plasma or lcd. think previous owner had it isf calibrated still get mates asking how i got the settings perfect



oh one major thing i dont like with its is that it has fan inside which i wished i could get to, as i have to blast the dust clean from my pc every couple of months
 
Last edited:
+1 for me too, I love my panasonic plasma, compared to LCD's it seems so much more easier on the eyes!! fantastic for films too.
 
I have both, and all i can say is, whats been said already. Plasma better blacks, no motion blur to speak of, reflective screens. LCD , sharper detail, motion blur , greyish black levels and non reflective. My plasma is only 2 months old, a LG 50" , it replaced a faulty Toshiba 46" LCD. Had to install blackout blinds in living room for the plasma. I have a 42" LCD in my bedroom, and i do prefer the sharpness they give, but the black levels, and motion lag annoy. Take your pick really. Lifespan, pointless, 5 year warentee with all sets i get. Dont know anyone who claim one set will outlive another with any certainty.
 
Just a thought, many say the latest LED LCD look too sharp... but I was again looking at many screens at the weekend and I must say I prefer the sharp look. Plasma to my eyes looks blurry and lacking detail.

Maybe it's my eyes, but isn't things we see with our eyes nice and sharp off the screen ? (must be true or you wouldn't comment on screen sharpness)

The sharpness is there as the detail in the video source is... the loss of apparent detail in plasma just doesnt feel right to me. (I'm guessing the individually lit plasma pixels cause this blurry effect as it's too much to handle for the old eyes)

Maybe with a SD source plasma makes sense, as you are using the inherent bluring to help the low quality of the feed, but for HD, surely you want to see it as it's meant to be...

I've decided I'm never going to buy a plasma, sure I can save abit of wedge on a larger screen, but I like the perfect sharpness of a LED LCD. Whatever floats your boat though :)
 
I think it's more that the good plasma's are giving out just as much detail to the eye but without the nasty over sharpening artefacts.
 
Earth[Tera].bin;17343169 said:
Had my Panasonic TH42PW7 plasma for around 5 years and it's still going strong, touch wood.
Click to expand...

Do new plasma screens have a better lifespan than the older ones? I remember in the days when plasma was a very new technology and people were being sold stories that you have to "re-charge" your gases once every 5 years. Was that always a load of rubbish, or was there an element of truth to it? And what's the situation now?

Thanks guys!
 
Plasma will die at the same time LCD does - when the nextgen tech arrives, be that OLED or whatever.

For now, there are far too many devoted to the benefits of plasma over LCD for it to die. Equally LCD has benefits over plasma, and which you want comes down to personal preference.
 
Flukester said:
Just a thought, many say the latest LED LCD look too sharp... but I was again looking at many screens at the weekend and I must say I prefer the sharp look. Plasma to my eyes looks blurry and lacking detail.

Maybe it's my eyes, but isn't things we see with our eyes nice and sharp off the screen ? (must be true or you wouldn't comment on screen sharpness)

The sharpness is there as the detail in the video source is... the loss of apparent detail in plasma just doesnt feel right to me. (I'm guessing the individually lit plasma pixels cause this blurry effect as it's too much to handle for the old eyes)

Maybe with a SD source plasma makes sense, as you are using the inherent bluring to help the low quality of the feed, but for HD, surely you want to see it as it's meant to be...

I've decided I'm never going to buy a plasma, sure I can save abit of wedge on a larger screen, but I like the perfect sharpness of a LED LCD. Whatever floats your boat though :)
Click to expand...

Dont assume that the sharpness is necessarily there as part of the video source. Both LCDs and Plasmas reconstruct their images with all sorts of digital processing, including sharpening and edge enhancement. Not all things in life are necessarily sharp, heat haze, atmospherics, polution etc all lead to slightly soft or blurry images in real life. LED to me is much like the sudden interest in HDR photography, this sudden desire for oversharpened oversaturated images. Look at all of the childrens photography companies that have sprung up, all they sell is nasty oversaturated images (at a massive premium), but it is fashioanble to have images of your kids where the gamma has been hiked by about 25% and edge sharpening applied and so many people expect similar of their TVs. It reminds me of the 70s when I was a kid and people had their first colour TV sets. They would crank the colour up to the max, so that everything almost glowed, with the attitude I paid for colour and I am going to get as much of it as I can!! To me LCD is great for video games and anime / cartoons but for anything that pertains to real world photography, Plasma delivers a much more faithful image.
 
SimonR said:
I disagree. Panasonic purchased all of the technology and patents for the Kuro from Pioneer as well as migrating their entire development team into Panasonics Labs. Pioneer pulled out of the Plasma business as the cost of manufacture of the Kuros was way to high (at the time) to support a viable manufacturing business. Since then the Panasonic / Pioneer team have worked to bring the cost of the technology down, to a point where it is viable.
Whether the current, high end Panasonic Plasmas are better then Kuro's is debateable. The Kuro, although the 'holy grail' of plasmas for many enthusiats, were far from perfect as they suffered from a slightly softer image, compared to many modern plasmas, although their Blacks, were the best available. Whether you see this as a flaw or not is debateable, but the new VT25's have near Kuro Blacks, a slightly sharper image and 3D capability and it gets a better Energy Rating.

I will agree that there hasn't been a significant improvement in plasma PQ since the Kuro, but the Kuro itself was a massive jump in its own right.

Finally is plasma dying, I dont think so. Its market share may have shrunk somewhat, but for many (including me) it is still the viewing medium of choice.
Click to expand...
No doubt, if you want 3D and energy efficiency then a Kuro isn't for you but I personally haven't seen anything (LCD) to rival the picture quality, which was my point.

Mine is ISF calibrated, so I'd say I am a biased case though :D
 
Flukester said:
Just a thought, many say the latest LED LCD look too sharp... but I was again looking at many screens at the weekend and I must say I prefer the sharp look. Plasma to my eyes looks blurry and lacking detail.

Maybe it's my eyes, but isn't things we see with our eyes nice and sharp off the screen ? (must be true or you wouldn't comment on screen sharpness)

The sharpness is there as the detail in the video source is... the loss of apparent detail in plasma just doesnt feel right to me. (I'm guessing the individually lit plasma pixels cause this blurry effect as it's too much to handle for the old eyes)

Maybe with a SD source plasma makes sense, as you are using the inherent bluring to help the low quality of the feed, but for HD, surely you want to see it as it's meant to be...

I've decided I'm never going to buy a plasma, sure I can save abit of wedge on a larger screen, but I like the perfect sharpness of a LED LCD. Whatever floats your boat though :)
Click to expand...

Well maybe you should stop feeling soo much like a woman and look at it like a man :p:p;)

I can say with certainty that you will not have seen an 'accurate' image on one of the best sets out there to know how as image should look. Lots of I think and I assume this and that. We are all going to have differing views but before you decide then get yourself to a proper shop and see a properly calibrated plasma like a 9G kuro (if any left) or pr0 panny.

I used to be all about the sharpness, pixel count etc until I saw what a well setup tv could really do. It really can be annoying these days where people who nothing about tvs act like a self professed god on the subject and quote spec sheets, contrast ratios and sharpness at you with them not having a ****ing clue what they are on about.

See a well setup plasma playing a variety of footage next to an LCD with your preferred look and you will be converted.
 
EVH said:
No doubt, if you want 3D and energy efficiency then a Kuro isn't for you but I personally haven't seen anything (LCD) to rival the picture quality, which was my point.

Mine is ISF calibrated, so I'd say I am a biased case though :D
Click to expand...

EVH I dont disagree, V25 or Kuro I have seen nothing LCD to compare. And if I recall Pioneer required its dealers to go on ISF calibration courses and they were supposed to install and calibrate sets for customers as part of the package.
 
Flukester, with regards to sharpness, you should see my G20 Panasonic with Bluray. What plasma doesn't do as well as LCD is add sharpness to an SD image, it does however look a lot better due to the way it handles motion. I'm greatly looking forward to OLEDs of a good size. The main advantage of plasmas is that the cells emit their own light as opposed to having a backlight (LED or CCFL in LCDs). OLED should have the best of both techs.
 
-Ad- said:
Well maybe you should stop feeling soo much like a woman and look at it like a man :p:p;)

I can say with certainty that you will not have seen an 'accurate' image on one of the best sets out there to know how as image should look. Lots of I think and I assume this and that. We are all going to have differing views but before you decide then get yourself to a proper shop and see a properly calibrated plasma like a 9G kuro (if any left) or pr0 panny.

I used to be all about the sharpness, pixel count etc until I saw what a well setup tv could really do. It really can be annoying these days where people who nothing about tvs act like a self professed god on the subject and quote spec sheets, contrast ratios and sharpness at you with them not having a ****ing clue what they are on about.

See a well setup plasma playing a variety of footage next to an LCD with your preferred look and you will be converted.
Click to expand...

what about if i dont want my picture calibrated, what if i prefer my colours to be slightly more vivid. Does that make me wrong for liking colours that arent ISF calibrated accurate ?

And what about if you put a well set up plasma playing a variet of footage next to a well set up expensive LCD telly ?

Thats when things tend to get blurred. You can argue that perhaps a £1600 LCD and £1000 plasma arent comparable, but to somebody who is willing to pay the extra £600 to have the looks and power sumption etc.. of an LCD, what do you say to them?

Its not nearly as simple as you make out.
 
it's worth remembering that a Plasma's power consumption is dynamic. If, for example, you're watching a film with lots of dark scenes or blacks then Plasma can actually consume LESS power than an LCD. An LCD backlight is always on whereas a Plasma gets it's brightness from the plasma cells directly, there is no backlight. Sure for the same scene an LCD may have lower power consumption it's often not as big a gap as you seem to imply.

You say a £1600 LCD may have a better picture than a £1000 Plasma. You're probably right. However, a £1600 plasma will still give a far better picture than a £1600 LCD. If you want to kid yourself that bright colours and brightness/contrast through the roof is a 'good' picture, then buy your LCD and remain stuck in your ways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom