Plasma or LCD TV

[mrc 0]

One thing to note about plasma television sets is that they (in general) have shorter lifespans and if you watch a lot of channels that have logos on them (and many do), the logo can eventually become permanently "burned" into the screen. LCD, on the other hand, has a longer lifespan and burn-in isn't a problem.

So why not go with LCD? Well, I'd say nine times out of ten, LCD screens will be smaller than plasma. So if you want a really big television, plasma is sometimes the only way to go.

Those logos aren't a factor anymore. The companies have gotten smart and haven't kept them as static logos. Like I said, i've had my plasma for four years and I have ZERO screen burn. The one thing you will have to watch is if you play video games on it and like to leave a game paused for a long time. You just can't do that...

Need to buy a new TV. Looking at Plasma and LCD but still undecided which is best and what brand to go for.

Have seen some LG's in a 42" plasma around 900.00 as well as a Panasonic LCD around 800

I went to buy one myself. The manager of the store was a friend of mine and he would not sell a plasm to me. He told me they were good for only about 5000 hours which is about three years according to him.

I bought a 37 inch LCD from Costco instead. Vizio, it works bueatifully

Early plasma panels had half-lives of only several thousand hours, but modern panels boast anywhere from 30,000-60,000 hours which is on par with current LCDs lamp life ratings.

Do the math...if you watched eight hours of TV a day (that's a lot of tv), that's over 10 years at 30000 hours.

[pedroh 21]

new plasma technology is affordable and has a longer lifespan, basically its up to you, wally world has some 40'ish plasmas for less than 2k.. and now lcd's have become cheaper.. true.. a lot of lcd's have this darker color stuff.. but there are ways to adjust them...

now be sure that your tv provider (cable, satellite) has HD option available, doesn't matter if u have HDTV Uber TV if ur tv shows are less than 480 lines.. u need a HD box or receiver to get the real HD on ur tv, and of course have the cables for it..

so, its really up to you, both of them are fancy... also it's recommendable to get the 'service plan' from wherever u're gonna get it.. they pick up the tv, and they can fix it.. even though lcd and plasma have become more reliable, u never know...

[Jenn! 918]

I love my Samsung LCD.

Another suggestion.... yes, we all hate the Evil Empire, but Wal-Mart's house brand - Ilo - has an amazingly good picture. (I suspect that they use Samsung LCDs)

Yes, I think we'll go with Samsung when we're ready to upgrade. I've always been so happy with all of my Samsung purchases.

[I'm Gone 60]

Figures that the public is being duped. Being sold a high priced item that doesn't last as long or provide a picture as good as a tube.

http://tinyurl.com/ymbxhl

Here's the catch. For more than half a century, traditional TV screens have had an aspect ratio of 4-to-3. That's the ratio of the width to the height. They were built that way to match the movie screens of the 1940s, and stayed that way even when CinemaScope and other wide-screen theater formats appeared during the 1950s.

Not so the latest HD sets. They have a wider, 16-to-9 aspect ratio that's great for action movies and sports, but doesn't bring much to sitcoms and dramas.

Now let's do some geometry (or just trust me with the math). A standard 50-inch diagonal TV screen is 40 inches wide and 30 inches high. That provides a viewing area of 1,200 square inches. But a 50-inch diagonal HD screen with today's wider aspect ratio provides a mere 1,063 square inches of display area.

So HD manufacturers give you 11 percent less TV than you got for the same diagonal measurement in the old days. And they're charging considerably more. This makes TV the only household technology that's becoming more expensive.

True, high-definition sets offer a better picture, but if you're not a sports addict or movie fan, you may not care. In that case, you'll be paying more for exactly the same utility you got from the old set. If that bothers you, hold off for now. Relatively inexpensive digital TVs in standard resolution and format are available now. But you'll have a better selection of basic sets in a year or so, as the industry gets ready to switch from analog to digital broadcasting in February 2009.

The change in aspect ratio of HD sets may pinch your pocketbook in another direction if you're replacing a TV that's in a cabinet, entertainment center, or some other horizontal space limited by walls or furniture.

To fit a wide HD screen into a space designed for a standard set, you'll have to be satisfied with a screen that's smaller overall. Or, you can buy a new cabinet, which any retailer will be delighted to sell you because it carries a higher markup than the TV itself.

Measure the space available for your TV - height, width and depth - before you leave home or start shopping online. Then measure the HD sets you find. Don't go by the advertised screen size - check out the overall width, height and depth of the set. Online, you'll find them in the technical specs.

Some have bezels or frames that extend well beyond the edge of the screen to accommodate speakers or controls. When I checked out 42-inch plasma screens this week, I found sets that varied from 45 to 53 inches wide.

Now for the technology HDTVs employ - which can make a considerable difference in their size, cost and performance.

CRT sets that use old-fashioned cathode ray tubes are rapidly disappearing from the HD market, even though they still provide the best overall image. The problem is that their picture tubes are too deep and heavy for HD sets much larger than 34 inches. I bought a high-definition CRT set 18 months ago and enjoy it - but the flat panel sets available now are less expensive and look just as good.

LCD sets use the same liquid crystal displays found in laptop computers. They're the thinnest and lightest flat panel sets, with excellent color reproduction. Their underlying technology is also well understood, making them the best all-around choice for flat panel TVs. Problems: LCDs can get very expensive in sizes above 36 inches and may not produce blacks as deep as plasma sets. Cheaper LCDs may display ghosting in action sequences or a falloff in brightness at severe viewing angles.

Plasma screens use tiny bubbles of incandescent gas to produce their images. Heavier than LCDs but still relatively flat and light, they produce the brightest, crispest display for the money in screens over 40 inches. Downside: Plasma screens suffer more from glare than LCDs and their underlying technology hasn't been as well tested over time. They also have a reputation for "burning in" static images, a problem that manufacturers say they've licked. Even so, fierce competition in 42-inch models make these good buys on Black Friday - if you get up early enough to snag one.

Rear projection sets are usually 50 inches or larger. They're deeper than flat panel screens, but usually not as deep as tube-based sets. They use various technologies to generate a relatively small image that's projected onto a large screen. These image generators include cathode ray tubes, LCDs, digital light processors, and exotic LcoS (liquid crystal on silicon) systems. At their biggest and best, projection TVs are breathtaking.

Downside: Projection sets vary widely in brightness, clarity and the "jaggies" that show up on the edges of moving objects. Almost all display a falloff in brightness when viewed from an angle, and they're more likely to break or need adjustment than other sets. To enjoy one, you should be willing to become a "home theater" operator.

[Heracles 417]

I would look for a tv that can support 1080P, which is the latest standard. These TV's have about 2 million mega pixel capabilities. AKA awesome pictures with HDTV or next generation DVD's..

The TV should at least support 1080I, which is about 1 million mega pixels.

LCD vs Plasma. I'd probably go for whichever supports the 1080P or at least 1080I spec and is in your price range..

[dalegg 143]

I would look for a tv that can support 1080P, which is the latest standard.

Yeah, you got to have something for that PS3!

[Yodrak 7]

MandR,

Don't look at type and brand as two independent issues. As with immigration issues it's the total package that counts including other features as well. Brand A's LCD may be superior to brand B's plasma but inferior to brand C's plasma, and all of them may be inferior to Brand D's LCD.

I just selected a 42" Panasonic plasma, and I'm pleased with it. But it was twice the price of what you're looking at from an on-line discounter (Best Buy matched the price).

Yodrak

Need to buy a new TV. Looking at Plasma and LCD but still undecided which is best and what brand to go for.

Have seen some LG's in a 42" plasma around 900.00 as well as a Panasonic LCD around 800

[mrc 0]

If I remember correctly, there are only like five or six actual plasma tv makers. The rest are considered "rebadges." Panasonic is one of the few that actually own their technology and it's the reason they put out one of the best plasma tvs. Brands like Sony are nothing but a rebadge...someone else makes the tv for them and they add a gadget or two to it and charge a tremendous amount more than the other company who makes the tv does.

[cmartyn 0]

True, there are not that many plants making LCD screens but the screens and there associated driving mechanisms can be made to very different specifications. You almost always get what you pay for. If you are looking at sub 1000 dollar 40" screens then try to remain oblivious to all of the associated video artifacts that will come in the box.

I have a widescreen LCD Sony box in the family room and a 32" 4*3 CRT in the living room. We watch the 32 almost exclusively. Why? Because it has a superior picture and the vast majority of what we watch (News and Pay per view) is still in the 4X3 format. When we rent a movie it's nice to watch it on the 40" widescreen but the widescreen in general is a pain in the ###. It has a smaller picture than the 32".

I dunno.. If I only had one TV Id toss that 2800.00 behemouth and keep the 600.00 box.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

now be sure that your tv provider (cable, satellite) has HD option available, doesn't matter if u have HDTV Uber TV if ur tv shows are less than 480 lines.. u need a HD box or receiver to get the real HD on ur tv, and of course have the cables for it..

Yes!! you need an HD signal to really benefit. SO many people I know have a HD TV but a non-HD signal.

[Nikita2Charles 32]

I bought this LCD TV

http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?...av=&browse=

Screen Size: 42" LCD

Aspect Ratio: 16:9

Resolution: 1920 x 1080

Brightness: 550 cd/m²

Contrast Ratio: 1000:1

Response Time: 8ms

Viewing Angle: 176 L/R, 176 u/dfrom Costco a few months ago, now it's already $100 cheaper. The TV name is from a company called SPECTRE, they are very popular in the industrial large scren market but now going into the common household size.

BENEFIT.

1 year no question ask WARRANTY from Cosco, FREE SHIPPING

Even though you buy it online from Costco.com you can return it to any costco if you don't like it.

[yogib37 3]

Need to buy a new TV. Looking at Plasma and LCD but still undecided which is best and what brand to go for.

Have seen some LG's in a 42" plasma around 900.00 as well as a Panasonic LCD around 800

I went to buy one myself. The manager of the store was a friend of mine and he would not sell a plasm to me. He told me they were good for only about 5000 hours which is about three years according to him.

I bought a 37 inch LCD from Costco instead. Vizio, it works bueatifully

Yes. I agree with you. I dont have a big screen LCD or Plasma, but I want one and when I get one I thinking of the 42" Vizio. That is a sweet television. I work in cable and been to a couple of peoples homes that have one and they look great..

I would recomend Vizio. www.vizio.com

Take care

yogi