plasma tv vs lcd tv

macachia

macachia

macachia

Associate
Joined
27 Jun 2003
Posts
362
Can anyone tell me the main difference between plasma & lcd tvs? I know lcd tvs have higher resolutions and are HD ready. But what about quality, clarity and overall performance?

I'm asking this since most 32inch lcd-tvs locally cost as much as 42inch plasma (albeit the normal 1024*768 ones though)

thanks
 
Plasma appear to use a lot more electricity and generate greater heat Plasma appear cheaper at present in the larger sizes.
I'm sitting on the fence and awaiting cheaper LCD's
 
Last edited:
One thing to think about when choosing which one to get is a Plasma tv is like a light bulb and as time goes on the picture colour will change.

For example, a light bulb in your house starts of white'ish and a year later it turns yellow in colour.

This is similar with Plasma's but not LCD's.

I know several shops that have limited the number of Plasma TV's they display to sell as quite a few customers have come back near a year down the line to complain about the quality drop with the their plasma tv's.

It's one of the reason's why I would't spend £1000+ on a plasma with the knowlege that the picture quality will never be the same as time goes on and I've seen the proof to back it up.

LCD's may be prone to dead pixels but I'd rather take that risk.
 
marmalade said:
Plasma appear to use a lot more electricity and generate greater heat Plasma appear cheaper at present in the larger sizes.
I'm sitting on the fence and awaiting cheaper LCD's
Click to expand...

They have a higher maximum draw, in tests plasmas of the same size use no more and often less than LCD's.
 
Scream said:
One thing to think about when choosing which one to get is a Plasma tv is like a light bulb and as time goes on the picture colour will change.

For example, a light bulb in your house starts of white'ish and a year later it turns yellow in colour.

This is similar with Plasma's but not LCD's.

I know several shops that have limited the number of Plasma TV's they display to sell as quite a few customers have come back near a year down the line to complain about the quality drop with the their plasma tv's.

It's one of the reason's why I would't spend £1000+ on a plasma with the knowlege that the picture quality will never be the same as time goes on and I've seen the proof to back it up.

LCD's may be prone to dead pixels but I'd rather take that risk.
Click to expand...

Rubbish, total rubbish.

After 60000 hours the brightness can go, thats as long as the backlight on a LCD lasts and longer than the average live of a crt tube.

I know people with 5 and 6 year old plasmas that look the same (infact better) than the day they where installed. The pw3/PW4/PW5 are considered better than most new plasmas and still better than any LCD avaliable today.

Maybe the plasmas at the dealer where cheap and rubbish, none of the better brands (Panasonic, Pioneer + Fujitsu) or even the midrange (Hitachi, LG etc) suffer from this.
 
People tend to buy lcd up to 37" and plasma over that size.

I personally think a good plasma looks more natural and the larger screen size at a competitive price appeals to me.

With plasma you still have to be mindfull of image retention (screen burn), lcd dont suffer from this.

The way the lcd screens I have seen handled dark scenes,viewed in a darkened room put me off but for all I know that could have improved by now.

At the time I was buying, the best plasma screens still produced better images than the best lcd, better blacks and handled moving images better to my eye, but things move fast so trust your own eyes.
 
agree, it really annoys me with the lcd vs plasma bull.

basically its simple if you want anything 32" and under you have no choice really lcd is the only way you can go. anything over that plasma is the only way. I work with this kit, and to be honest I'd never buy an lcd over 32". As for life span and colour dying and plasmas not having a high resolution is absolute rubbish and they will both generate a fair bit of heat

plasma -
pros: blacks are black, whites are white, contrast is better, faster response times, running hd is cleaner and everything else for that matter.
cons: suffers slightly more than lcd from image retention, however not an issure once the plasma has run in, I've only had it once, of which went very quickly whilst running in my pioneer.

LCD -
pros: cheaper to manufacture (which is also why smaller sets are made in lcd generally), don't suffer as badly from screen retention (and before anyone says that they don't, they do and need to learn about products before they start going into one. manufacture reps that I meet at work confirm this and I have burnt 4 at work with a computer that was running high def that crashed during boot up on the bios, which we didn't notice till a couple of hours later)
cons: blacks aren't at all black, whites aren't quite there, slower response times very pixleated and not a clean picture even running High def. large LCD's i.e. 37"+ picture quality is NO SWEARING, Big Kev.

having said that some lcd's are nearly there i.e. the panny px60/600 range and the new tosh 66 range in 32" and under are ok, but still don't cut it. the new sony's are poo, picture quality is poor and the remotes look like kids toy and 1 HDMI input, whats that all about?!!? However to get anything worth while on a 42" plasma you should't bother without spending at least £1400ish generally as otherwise you'll mainly (not always mind) be looking at an absolute rubbish set that makes anything look terrible.

Myself I am on my second plasma (and before you say it, I wanted to simply upgrade with the times) I had a Hitachi 42pd5200, which is not a pioneer pdp436xde, which i would not trade for any lcd on the planet.

I am waiting to see what the future holds with the technology's of OLED, FLCD, and SED, which a few of you may know about, some won't (use google if you don't know) but this is going to be a fair while away yet.

anyway
 
I was told this by the owner of the major store that I was in. He's a multi millionaire and does know his stuff. He travels around the world on conferences checking future product releases.

He could be wrong but somehow his points do raise questions.

Yes maybe the cheapo brands are prone to the problem but yes for an Plasma costing over £2000 would last a hell of a lot longer.

At the end of the day, lcd/plasma tv's are only taking off now and one could compare the two products in a years time or even 2 years times.

The guy in the store however would have more experience in this field having being using lcd's/plasma from day 1 so I guess his opinions would have more weight than my own and many others on these boards.
 
Bad Ass said:
plasma -
pros: blacks are black, whites are white, contrast is better, faster response times, running hd is cleaner and everything else for that matter.

cons: suffers slightly more than lcd from image retention, however not an issure once the plasma has run in, I've only had it once, of which went very quickly whilst running in my pioneer.
Click to expand...

i would disagree there. The latest sonys come in at 8ms and the latest P-MVA panel found in the 32" and 40" gives superb viewing angles, so no more funny images when not viewing dead on, and whats more, they do give perfect blacks

LCDs have caught up so much on these fronts its not really a valid argument anymore. I had a Panasonic 37inch plasma and the sony 40" LCD side by side running hi - def footage in currys, and the blacks on both were perfect.

i would however say, that when switching to the freeview tuner, the plasma didnt show the poor quality of the broadcasts as much as the LCD did. So plasma does look better when showing poor quality stuff, as theres no "chickenwire" effect
 
There has been so much rubbish posted in this thread it's incredible.
There has also been a lot of good information though.

A few things I would like to correct:

Plasma TV are not more prone to blowing up than a CRT or LCD.

ALL TV technologies lose brightness with age.

I have yet to see a Plasma/LCD that is able to scale a SD image and look as good as a SD CRT.

Most people do not save any space by purchasing a "flat screen" as they sit them on large corner units.


Therefore, as HD isn't really mainstream (yet, give it another 12-24 months) I am sticking with my CRT.
 
macachia said:
so plasmas with a resolution of only 852x480 are still compatible with hdvd and bluray players?
Click to expand...

A plasma with that resolution wouldn't support HDTV resolutions and won't have DVI or HDMI connections, but you could connect the HD source to it via component as long as the TV can downscale or the source can output at the lower resolution. I belive HD-DVD and bluray will be capable of this but I'd have to question what the point was?
 
pinkaardvark said:
A plasma with that resolution wouldn't support HDTV resolutions and won't have DVI or HDMI connections, but you could connect the HD source to it via component as long as the TV can downscale or the source can output at the lower resolution. I belive HD-DVD and bluray will be capable of this but I'd have to question what the point was?
Click to expand...

There are Plasma TV with panels of this resolution and HDMI connectors and they are marketed as "HD Compatible" so you need to be careful and check things out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom