Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Huskie

New TV LCD or PLasma?

22 posts in this topic

I need to buy a new tv for the fall sports viewing season. I have done so much research I'm getting more confused than ever. I want a 42 in. screen, looking at LG brand and would like to stay under $1500. What do you have that you like or any other recommendations would be helpful, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That thread was about which LCD to buy, not really a LCD vs. Plasma.

I purchased a LCD instead of a Plasma because my living room gets alot of light during the day. LCD tends to be more energy efficient as well. Plasma has a faster recovery rate but LCD is catching up. It's more or less going to come down to your personal preferences on picture quality and black levels.

Have fun shopping!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to agree. If I was in the market for a new HDTV I'd probably look at LCD's, although space isn't an issue in my situation so some of the projection sets would also be considered as well. With the black levels and contrast ratios increasing on LCD sets I believe plasma TV's will be eventually phased out before not too long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the plasma has a better picture because it is quicker (no blurs in sports) and it has blacker black and whiter white. Yes, the plasma's can burn out, but they are rated at 20,000 hours minimum now. If you look at them side by side, it's easy to see plasma is better.

The next thing is 720i, 1080i, 720p, 1080p.....The 720p has a better resolution than 1080i. It is explained if you do a google search and agian easy to see side by side. The 1080p will give you the very best picture, and if you have HD programming along with it, you have the best system today. Tomorrow may be a different story.

If you do a google search for a tv for watching sports. The 1080p Plasma will get the best reviews and the specs speak for themselves.

Myself I have a 720p Plasma and the picture is outstanding next to a lcd 1080i.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although if you are one to leave the tv on all night, those 20,000 hours may come up faster than 10 years of regular viewing. Then I would suggest an lcd. Figure out the math, 20,000 hours is many years of regular viewing time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A while ago, i heard that if you do video games on the TV's that LCD is the way to go.

Dont know if that still holds up or not. Something else to debate grin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was the other way around due to the faster speed of plasma vs. LCD. I'm not a gamer but that's what I thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was the other way around due to the faster speed of plasma vs. LCD. I'm not a gamer but that's what I thought.

You're right.

One other thing I noticed(not sure about lcd) but this new plasma does not collect dust. Don't be afraid to buy black. We haven't had to dust it at all yet! I am actually amazed at that. I thought it would be terrible like a regular tv, but it is as clean as the day I took it out of the box 5 months ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 120Hz LCD's sets will essentially eliminate any blur or speed concerns and should be looked at if leaning towards LCD.

The latest LCD's have a much higher contrast ratio than just a few years ago so the difference in "blacker blacks" between plasma and LCD is pretty much history....at least on the better LCD sets, not the cheaper Walmart versions. Plasma doesn't have the advantage that it used to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

with plasma you wont get the bluryness or the herky jerky motion with sports ,like roofer said ,but if you can put up with it LCD is the way to go their cheaper

The 720p plasma is better than the 1080i But the 1080p is the best, then your talken money. Though you really dont see much differanc than the 720p and the 1080p save your money and go for the 720p plasma

This is what I learned a year ago so I'm sure the advances have come further today

I would look into what LIMITOUT was sugesting also

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to remember about 1080p is that the only time it will come into play is when you are watching BlueRay movies or playing a 1080p game.

There is currently no 1080p programming and probably won't be for a long time.

I wouldn't make a decision based on a poll here. Go to the store and see what looks best to you, what fits your budget and what style fits your decor.

You can't go wrong with either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dtro is right about lack of 1080p sources other than Blu-Ray.

1080p TV's will upconvert the incoming signal though if you're only feeding it 720 or 1080i.

Dish Network recently revealed their "Turbo HD" package which will have 1080p PPV and the receivers were upgraded via a software patch to enable 1080p.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a 42" plazma and we have it in a south facing living room with lots of windows and the picture looks great. While at the store, it had the best picture of all of the other 42 " screens and the price was right. The only thing I don't like about it is the amount of heat that comes off it and I therefore I think it is using a lot of electricity. I was told LCDs use less.

Nels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the same boat...I've done a ton of research and would love to pull the trigger on a new television. Based on what I've gathered it seems LCD technology will be dropping in price for consumers over the next 4-6 months. As others have mentioned, many cable/satellite providers are just beginning to facilitate HD signals. It's a tough time for consumers to purchase right now, but with the format wars over and the big switch glooming over our heads the future looks bright...High Definition bright. wink

(Note from Admin, please read forum policy before posting again,thank-you.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've had a Sony Bravia LCD for about 8 months now and it's an awesome picture! We chose the LCD over Plasma because it's less glare and uses less energy as it runs cooler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I own both an 26" LCD and a 42" Plasma. Both units are under 6 months old. The plasma is by far leaps and bounds ahead of LCD. In my observation the plasma has deeper darks and brighter lights. No blurring, and to me, most important; you can see it from all view angles, whether you're to the left/right, or sitting on the couch or floor. The only reason I purchased an LCD is because small plasmas are hard to find.

Pick up a copy of consumer reports, they rate Panasonic as one of the best brands in plasma, and thus far I've been incredibly happy with mine. Win lose or draw, with an LCD or Plasma, you'll see a remarkable differance from your old tube style TV. Good luck and enjoy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as I thought, both LCD and Plasma have their fans. I did check out the consumer reports issue that Ross T mentioned. The highest ratings also were the highest price, you get what you pay for. I wonder if the prices will continue to drop or if the transportation costs from Asia will eat that up. Still leaning a bit towards the 42 LCD for our situation. Decision time is right around the corner, thanks for the input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you get what you pay for.

That's exactly right. You'll get the better contrast ratios with the higher-end LCD's, Samsung has good specs for example. When you hear those who say that plasma is better than LCD, the LCD they are comparing to most likely doesn't have the quality spec's that the higher end LCD's do and isn't an apples to apples comparison to the plasma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ones I looked at were around $1000. I ended up with a 42" Samsung plasma and it was a few bucks cheaper than the LCD. The plasma had a better picture in that price range and a better price. Although, the the LCD was a 1080i and my plasma is a 720p.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an article I found on the subject......

Plasma TV vs. LCD

Reviewer: Phil Connor

This is a complicated topic: when choosing between LCD and plasma TVs, you're actually selecting between two competing technologies, both of which achieve similar features (i.e., bright, crystal-clear images, super color saturated pictures) and come in similar packages (i.e., 3.5 to 5 inch depth flat screen casing). To complicate the decision-making process further, price and size are two previous considerations that are rapidly becoming non-issues as LCDs are now being made in larger sizes and at competing prices with plasma TVs.

Despite all these similarities, these technologies differ in how they process and display incoming video/computer signals.

Plasma flat screen technology consists of hundreds of thousands of individual pixel cells, which allow electric pulses (stemming from electrodes) to excite rare natural gases-usually xenon and neon-causing them to glow and produce light. This light illuminates the proper balance of red, green, or blue phosphors contained in each cell to display the proper color sequence from the light. Each pixel cell is essentially an individual microscopic florescent light bulb, receiving instruction from software contained on the rear electrostatic silicon board. Look very closely at a plasma TV and you can actually see the individual pixel cell coloration of red, green, and blue bars. You can also see the black ribs which separate each.

Whether spread across a flat-panel screen or placed in the heart of a projector, all LCD displays come from the same technological background. A matrix of thin-film transistors (TFTs) supplies voltage to liquid-crystal-filled cells sandwiched between two sheets of glass. When hit with an electrical charge, the crystals untwist to an exact degree to filter white light generated by a lamp behind the screen (for flat-panel TVs) or one projecting through a small LCD chip (for projection TVs). LCD monitors reproduce colors through a process of subtraction: They block out particular color wavelengths from the spectrum of white light until they're left with just the right color. And, it's the intensity of light permitted to pass through this liquid-crystal matrix that enables LCD televisions to display images chock-full of colors-or gradations of them.

PICTURE QUALITY

As the above advantages show, plasma technology has the better picture quality in normal to low room lighting conditions and are better in 4 out of 5 picture quality categories. Plasma technology will almost without exception triumph during night time viewing. LCD televisions are great for sunroom/breakfast room type environments. Also, LCD monitors are generally better for public display such as airport signage and retail store signage due to the bright room light environment. See full article on plasma vs. LCD picture quality.

ADVANTAGE: Plasma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • wear a good balaclava and get a open face with a cold weather breath box never had a problem
    • In my opinion I would look for a nice used wingmaster 2 of my friends have bought a new 870 express about a year apart and they both had the same shell extraction problems. Maybe just a fluke but when I see two different people have the same problem with a Gun makes me think to find a different choice. Heck I have a Mossberg 500 that I treat like poop and I have never had one single malfunction.   I have shot my friends newer express and I can really tell the difference in quality beside my wingmaster  
    • I have Ice Kings.  They are in a word, awesome.  They are about 20-25 years old. Dang I hate dating myself but I have never even bought new liners for these boots.  They are probably one of the finest products I won.  I have never had so much as a chill i my feet.  I usually fish outside but if I am in a flip over, my feet are usually on the ice.  Again, never a chill.  I typically wear a midnight smart wool sock.   For some reason I have been considering new boots.  I guess it is the weight, I would love to have something that is not s heavy and also has better traction.   Today I visited Joe's Sporting Goods and saw some really nice boots (they have a great selection) by Muck, Lacrosse, Sorel, Baffin and some other Canadian made boot that looked very nice. I checked out the ice Kings........they are not the same boot as I have, they don't seem to have the quality to me.  They might be as warm but the rubber feels more stiff almost like it would crack, the uppers are solid leather, mine are leather and corder combo.  The liner also seemed thinner.   After looking at all the boots, I am surprised none offer water proof uppers. Also I am not entirely certain why some seem extend up to your knee with insulation.  Just seems like Over kill because most who would where these boots owed also have some sort of insulated pant on.  Overall I found the boots to be pretty heavy, I was surprised with 20 years past boots have not advanced more.
    • But will be missed but most.............you mad bro?    
    • You boxed yourself.   He was not supporting the Vikings stadium, he was saying that Republicans supported it and now are feigning outrage over the cook subsidy. And then not to be outdone the Republicans are now celebrating the Carrier subsidy.   Pretty much just reinforced his point.      
    • Think we should change the topic to "Trump for Trees."........and all will be well.
    • Had to go all the way back to Missouri to hunt in the snow this year! Beautiful morning but not much movement. Did see some late rut activity Friday.
    • Dotch, you guys over there are almost famous....   Almost because it is Waseca, but whatever.    Mark Seeley's weather blog... http://blog-weathertalk.extension.umn.edu/   .... Waseca now reports 54.13 inches of precipitation for 2016 and this is a new statewide annual precipitation record, surpassing the old one of 53.52" at St Francis (Anoka County) in 1991.
      ....   And an interesting thought...(from Mark, not me) Commentary on Winter TIME: No question will be answered this week, but I want to take TIME to make a comment about Winter TIME. Managing the TIME in the Winter Season in Minnesota is a different ball game than other seasons of the year, because everything takes longer. No question winter will be felt more frequently soon in the daily weather, and snowfalls will become more frequent this month. The rash of bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicular accidents reported during the snow storms towards the end of November reminded me about adjusting for Winter TIME. Our concept of time needs to be adjusted. Lengthen the time intervals that you have intuitively built-into your everyday habits and tasks. It takes longer to walk places, longer to drive places, longer to dress and undress, longer to warm up the car, longer to degomble (shed snow) when you come into the house. You need to make time to shovel snow, scrape the windshield, clean the furnace filters, When you walk take shorter steps and not too fast...put the boots, gloves and hat on when you go outside....check on the neighbor if their place hasn't been shoveled...everything should slow down..except for the long Minnesota goodbye..that is better shortened...just say goodbye, open the door, leave and close the door behind you....no need to stand in an open doorway for minutes conversing about last minute stuff. Winter TIME is an adjustment that may save you anxiety, regret, or even injury.
    • Would you use a bobber on your rattle reel with these? I would think a lively minnow would pull the line out of the contacts.
    • My my, how the mighty have fallen...  I went back to the thread on the cook subsidy, and what did I find in the second post from you, on the second page....     Gee, you were ok with the 66 million because it wasn't a stadium or something, but now all butt hurt over 7 million of Indiana money?    Now that there is a funny joke.  
  • Our Sponsors