LCD or Plasma?

[Porps_is_HOT_loz]

Last night people were having a look at our big screan television and the convasation became "Is LCD better then Plasma" as our TV is a Plasma.

Would like to know everyones thoughts and why.

I would say LCD picture is supposed to be better but when watching the footy It seems to be a bit delayed because of all the movement.

Plasma for me.

 

[Mancey]

The answer varies depending on what you want it for, and of course the quality of the panel.

If you have a nice home theatre room that you can darken, and want it for mostly sports and movies, plasma is generally considered superior, mainly due to smoother display of fast moving images and better contrast.

However if you have a TV in a living area that is often lit, and/or use your TV for a fair bit of gaming, LCD is generally recommended. This is because LCD screens are easier to see in a light environment, and LCD's are less prone to "burn in" from still gaming images.

That all said, the gap is narrowing between the two in regard to their applications. Update times on LCD's now are super low. My 1080P LCD has a 5ms update time, and as a reult sports broadcasts look super sharp with no noticeable motion blur at all. On the other hand, pixel shifting in plasmas is making burn in when gaming a thing of the past.

A lot just comes down to the quality of the panel. Compare a LG LCD to a Pioneer plasma, and you'll think LCD is terrible. Or visa versa a cheap plasma against a sony bravia LCD will give you the opposite idea.

Certainly not a case of one or the other being superior. Rather choosing the right tool for the job.

 

[HBK619]

Basically all that Mancey said will ring true when getting one.

Although you will definetly want to try it out on a proper reception as the ones in store are usually much poorer that you might get in your home.

Also you will most likely want or get one for HD watching, if so then I would recommend trying to watch both the LCD and Plasma using a HD-DVD or Blu Ray Disc movie.

 

[Gman]

The answer varies depending on what you want it for, and of course the quality of the panel.

If you have a nice home theatre room that you can darken, and want it for mostly sports and movies, plasma is generally considered superior, mainly due to smoother display of fast moving images and better contrast.

However if you have a TV in a living area that is often lit, and/or use your TV for a fair bit of gaming, LCD is generally recommended. This is because LCD screens are easier to see in a light environment, and LCD's are less prone to "burn in" from still gaming images.

That all said, the gap is narrowing between the two in regard to their applications. Update times on LCD's now are super low. My 1080P LCD has a 5ms update time, and as a reult sports broadcasts look super sharp with no noticeable motion blur at all. On the other hand, pixel shifting in plasmas is making burn in when gaming a thing of the past.

A lot just comes down to the quality of the panel. Compare a LG LCD to a Pioneer plasma, and you'll think LCD is terrible. Or visa versa a cheap plasma against a sony bravia LCD will give you the opposite idea.

Certainly not a case of one or the other being superior. Rather choosing the right tool for the job.

Well posted

Pioneer is the standout in picture quality but pricey

I'd say Panasonic is just behind it, ( We're talking about the best models for Panasonic & Pioneer) Both Plasma screens and better in a dimmer environment

Sony, Samsung Toshiba and Sharp are top notch LCDs. But you'll find other cheaper brands that are also up there in LCDs EG. The top range Soniq suprisingly is not a bad LCD for the $ you are paying

100Hz is what was missing in LCDs, now that Sony,Samsung & Sharp make LCDs with 100Hz the blurring isnt noticeable on fast action.
You will hear that a LCD picture quality is not as good as the Pioneer or Panasonic but in all honesty the picture is very good, when viewing at home you will not notice any inferior picture, you'll be impressed

LCD is the future and its catching up fast

But I'll not vote just yet, as I'm split between a Sony/Samsung and the Panasonic
Give me a top notch Pioneer for less $ and I'll vote plasma

 

[Fwoy]

Well posted

Pioneer is the standout in picture quality but pricey

I'd say Panasonic is just behind it, ( We're talking about the best models for Panasonic & Pioneer) Both Plasma screens and better in a dimmer environment

Sony, Samsung Toshiba and Sharp are top notch LCDs. But you'll find other cheaper brands that are also up there in LCDs EG. The top range Soniq suprisingly is not a bad LCD for the $ you are paying

100Hz is what was missing in LCDs, now that Sony,Samsung & Sharp make LCDs with 100Hz the blurring isnt noticeable on fast action.
You will hear that a LCD picture quality is not as good as the Pioneer or Panasonic but in all honesty the picture is very good, when viewing at home you will not notice any inferior picture, you'll be impressed

LCD is the future and its catching up fast

But I'll not vote just yet, as I'm split between a Sony/Samsung and the Panasonic
Give me a top notch Pioneer for less $ and I'll vote plasma

an independent report housed on the Pioneer website.

http://www.pioneer.eu/eur/campaign/products/flatScreen.html

 

[Fwoy]

http://www.cnet.com.au/tvs/0,239035250,240036500,00.htm

Another article.

 

[Jafa]

Well posted

Pioneer is the standout in picture quality but pricey

I'd say Panasonic is just behind it, ( We're talking about the best models for Panasonic & Pioneer) Both Plasma screens and better in a dimmer environment

Sony, Samsung Toshiba and Sharp are top notch LCDs. But you'll find other cheaper brands that are also up there in LCDs EG. The top range Soniq suprisingly is not a bad LCD for the $ you are paying

100Hz is what was missing in LCDs, now that Sony,Samsung & Sharp make LCDs with 100Hz the blurring isnt noticeable on fast action.
You will hear that a LCD picture quality is not as good as the Pioneer or Panasonic but in all honesty the picture is very good, when viewing at home you will not notice any inferior picture, you'll be impressed

LCD is the future and its catching up fast

But I'll not vote just yet, as I'm split between a Sony/Samsung and the Panasonic
Give me a top notch Pioneer for less $ and I'll vote plasma

LCD isn`t the future - SED will probably be the next big thing.

At the moment I would opt for Plasma.

 

[Borgsta]

What is SED and how long before it becomes popular?

I'll be looking to get a plasma or LCD in July / August after my ridiculous tax return comes back. A lot will depend on the offer at the time but if LCD is able to play sports with no problem than I will most likely get that.

 

[Jafa]

SED is a little while off - and there may be a few other technologies that could usurp it before it goes mainstream. It will effectively give you CRT quality in a Plasma sized configuration.

 

[Mancey]

What is SED and how long before it becomes popular?

SED

One of those technologies that has been touted as the next big thing, but we may never see. Constant delays in rollout, and even if it does it seems it'll be ridiculously expensive.

Basically a flat panel CRT screen, with vastly superior contrast ratio's and update times in comparison to LCD/Plasma.

I thought laser tv was the next big thing, but it seems not according to this article...

 

[Gman]

LCD isn`t the future - SED will probably be the next big thing.

At the moment I would opt for Plasma.

SED...by the time they get it right and available LCDs will be cheaper and have an even greater picture,better contrast, power consumption will drop, motion blur will be a thing of the past...

SED will have to be fantastatic for most households giving up their LCDs...what will be their selling point that will persuade LCD owners???

Can't see it happening...

Thinner, lighter, less power consumption is the way of the future and LCDs can easily improve in all those areas

 

[Jafa]

SED already has a 3rd less power consumption than LCD.

It`s pretty simple in my book. Both Plasma and LCD are rubbish. Put them up against a CRT and it`s plainly obvious. People accept it because they get a nice big screen that they can hang on the wall cheaply. The picture quality is awful up close.

If a technology comes along that can give the clarity and crispness of CRT in a flat screen package - it will be snapped up.

However - there is certainly no point waiting for something that will take a while to land in our shops.

A small article. http://www.digitalworldtokyo.com/index.php/digital_tokyo/articles/sed_tvs_coming_in_late_2007/

 

[Jason5]

Whichever one you can get a better deal on

 

[Gman]

SED already has a 3rd less power consumption than LCD.

SED uses 33% the power consumption of a plasma not LCD

LCDs use less power than Plasmas.


http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/toshiba-regza-lcd-tv-1360.shtml

Below is an extract from the article:

Television: The Next Generation

In addition to their 2008 plans, Toshiba shared some future technologies that are currently under development in their labs. The Cell Broadband Engine chip (co-developed with Sony and IBM) will allow future Toshiba LCD televisions to pack even more processing power into their LCD TVs, allowing for better upconversion of standard definition material into high definition resolution and enabling up to 48 moving images to be displayed on one screen concurrently. Combine this enhanced processing power with an LED backlighting array of 1152 lights in 96 zones and we'll be seeing vastly improved contrast versus current LCD models. How much better? According to Toshiba, contrast ratios will be climbing all the way up to 100,000:1, an order of magnitude high than Toshiba's current best products.

The future is looking bright for LCD, and particularly for Toshiba's REGZA line.

Like I said, LCD technology will improve, there are so many makers out there...funny how Toshiba they are developing the Cell Broadband Engine chip with Sony after the Blue Ray vs HD DVD format war

I know Panasonic are looking into making LCDs.

Pioneer may follow eventually...

http://www.tech.co.uk/home-entertai...-tv-range-by-end-of-2008?articleid=2105176715

From what I can see many companies are working with each other to create that new technology.

Samsung and Sony to invest further in S-LCD Corp

2 September 2007 5:41 by James "Dela" Delahunty | 3 comments
Samsung Electronics Co. LTD and Sony Corp. will invest further in their joint LCD venture, S-LCD Corporation, which was formed in April 2004. According to a Samsung executive, the pair will invest further to meet rising demands for large sized flat-screen televisions. "Both sides reached a consensus on the joint investment and working-level officials are now discussing details such as the timing and amount of the investment," Yeong Duk Cho, vice president of Samsung's LCD business said.

The joint venture has just started shipments of LCD sets from an eight-generation production line, and the plan for further investment would see a second eighth-generation production line being produced. Such a line is capable of producing panels larger than 50-inches in size. "It took a couple of months for Sony to decide on its investment in the first 8G (eighth generation) line. I believe it'll take a similar period of time for Sony to make a decision on this," Cho said.

Considering the recent plans from Sharp Corp. to invest $3 billion in the construction of an LCD plant using tenth-generation technology, and now possible impending further investment for S-LCD Corp, the industry appears to be very confident about market demand for LCD in the coming years. A plant like that which Sharp envisions could output 60-inch or larger LCD panels.

"Sharp's tenth-generation facility is best suited for producing 42-inch panels, although it can use bigger glass sheets," Cho said. "For now, we want to concentrate on eighth-generation technology, targeting the 50-inch segment."
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/10947.cfm

 

[Abaddon]

LCD TV's are fantastic for HD media. PS3/xbox360 games, PC text, Blu-ray/HD-DVD movies look great. SD media like Foxtel/TV look like crap on LCD TV's.

 

[melbournemartin]

SED already has a 3rd less power consumption than LCD.

It`s pretty simple in my book. Both Plasma and LCD are rubbish. Put them up against a CRT and it`s plainly obvious. People accept it because they get a nice big screen that they can hang on the wall cheaply. The picture quality is awful up close.

If a technology comes along that can give the clarity and crispness of CRT in a flat screen package - it will be snapped up.

However - there is certainly no point waiting for something that will take a while to land in our shops.

A small article. http://www.digitalworldtokyo.com/index.php/digital_tokyo/articles/sed_tvs_coming_in_late_2007/

I did the next best thing and got an LG superslim which isn't that small at the back but has a great picture quality.

 

[Hawkers]

SED already has a 3rd less power consumption than LCD.

It`s pretty simple in my book. Both Plasma and LCD are rubbish. Put them up against a CRT and it`s plainly obvious. People accept it because they get a nice big screen that they can hang on the wall cheaply. The picture quality is awful up close.

If a technology comes along that can give the clarity and crispness of CRT in a flat screen package - it will be snapped up.

However - there is certainly no point waiting for something that will take a while to land in our shops.

A small article. http://www.digitalworldtokyo.com/index.php/digital_tokyo/articles/sed_tvs_coming_in_late_2007/

Spot on. I'm yet to see any LCD or Plasma look better than my Loewe Cantus that I bought 5 years ago
CRT's have such a better picture there is no comparison and until something becomes available that is as good as a CRT picture I won't be switching

 

[Mancey]

Spot on. I'm yet to see any LCD or Plasma look better than my Loewe Cantus that I bought 5 years ago
CRT's have such a better picture there is no comparison and until something becomes available that is as good as a CRT picture I won't be switching

For SD applications maybe

I switched to 1080P LCD because 90% of the stuff i watched was from a HD source. And take it from someone who put up with a CRT for a long time, HD pictures on a LCD look 1000% better than anything on a CRT screen.

God forbid that there was any small print in a 360 game on a CRT screen. It just looked like a blurry line. And my TV was a quality sony wega flatscreen.

SD broadcasts of sport look better on CRT, no doubt, but for anything HD, can't agree with that at all.

 

[jim boy]

SED uses 33% the power consumption of a plasma not LCD

LCDs use less power than Plasmas.

True, and given that there are moves afoot to ban plasmas becuase of this, (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/10/2055587.htm) then it would seem purchasing a plasma risks you going down a dead street. If the ban on sales of plasma's goes ahead, servicing and repair costs will climb hugely as well as a possible shortage of spares.

 

[bushranger]

Interesting with foxtel hd what the picture will be like.

 

[shifty-lefty]

yeah i agree pionner are leading the plasma quality race.
thats what we have at home a 157cm pionner plasma and it looks great
i watch alot of sports so i wouldnt like to have LCD tv to watch them.
But probs for movies LCD tvs would be better tho

 

[HBK619]

Interesting with foxtel hd what the picture will be like.

I'm guessing it will be in High Definition!

 

[Abaddon]

Interesting with foxtel hd what the picture will be like.

720p/1080i like 10 HD.