[gizlaroc]

Haha.

You don't need to anymore, just set it up for a good picture and it will be fine.

[WhiteKiteFauna]

Djee. I am back to square one. After reading this thread, I was set on plasma, 100%. I even chose PZ80, as the price quality was right. Then I went to the shop to look at it. They had a whole stand with Panasonics, plazma and lcd, showing the same NatGeo feed.
PZ80 was the worst of them, worse than even any LCD there. The letters were not sharp and colors bleached. If i had to choose right there I'd go for PZ8 or LCD tbh.

Oh, and some more hard facts about plasma:
+ very low response time (0.001 ms ), as opposed to 4ms of a high grade lcd - is it true, btw, any one knows?
- very high energy consumption (385 Watt, twice as an LCD the same size)
- weighs x2 times more than LCD (Samsung LCD 856 is 18kg, Panasonic's PZ80 is 43kg)

[Hades]

Well I am following that many threads on LCD and plasma I am officially about to go into meltdown.

[gizlaroc]

Originally Posted by WhiteKiteFauna

Oh, and some more hard facts about plasma:
+ very low response time (0.001 ms ), as opposed to 4ms of a high grade lcd - is it true, btw, any one knows?
- very high energy consumption (385 Watt, twice as an LCD the same size)
- weighs x2 times more than LCD (Samsung LCD 856 is 18kg, Panasonic's PZ80 is 43kg)

Response - Probably, but the latest LCDs have great motion.

Energy - Who really cares?? I mean would you really by a set with a crap picture and smile cause you know you are using slightly less power!

Weight - Most people stick them on a wall or stand, it isn't a [inappropriate verb removed by moderator] walkman!!

[The Snake]

Originally Posted by WhiteKiteFauna

Djee. I am back to square one. After reading this thread, I was set on plasma, 100%. I even chose PZ80, as the price quality was right. Then I went to the shop to look at it. They had a whole stand with Panasonics, plazma and lcd, showing the same NatGeo feed.
PZ80 was the worst of them, worse than even any LCD there. The letters were not sharp and colors bleached. If i had to choose right there I'd go for PZ8 or LCD tbh.

Oh, and some more hard facts about plasma:
+ very low response time (0.001 ms ), as opposed to 4ms of a high grade lcd - is it true, btw, any one knows?
- very high energy consumption (385 Watt, twice as an LCD the same size)
- weighs x2 times more than LCD (Samsung LCD 856 is 18kg, Panasonic's PZ80 is 43kg)

Don't take any notice of a shop viewing, ask them to connect it to a Blu Ray/DVD and play with the settings for a bit at least before you make a judgement.

[WhiteKiteFauna]

Khe, i did. That one had a remote attached to it on a leash, so i tried all kinds of stuff. I could not get it looking any as good as PZ8 right above. (Is not it supposed to be the latest, better model? Argh.)
And I particularly ask in the shops if they can put an SD feed, as it's the only thing I watch now.
That was a HD, I think, if it was SD, i'd reconsider. Will check it one more time.
Btw, the remote is far not as fancy as samsung's 856's I tried, it does not light up. And the menu on TV - looked very basic - could not they make it transparent and add some graphics?

[WhiteKiteFauna]

Originally Posted by gizlaroc

Response - Probably, but the latest LCDs have great motion.

Energy - Who really cares?? I mean would you really by a set with a crap picture and smile cause you know you are using slightly less power!

LCD's 4ms is 4000 times more than plasma's 0.001 ms, no matter how good LCD get it's a long way, right? Unless Panasonic's web site is lying about 0.001 ms, that is.

Of course if the picture is crap, i would not want it, even if it was 1 Watt. However, if the picture is just 95% worse on some channels, I would definitly consider. I dont know how much electricity costs in UK, but if the TV will be on 18/7 (and it probably will), I can buy a blu-ray player in a year on energy saving. Or get a HD subscription for that year.

[Costas]

Originally Posted by WhiteKiteFauna

Djee. I am back to square one. After reading this thread, I was set on plasma, 100%. I even chose PZ80, as the price quality was right. Then I went to the shop to look at it. They had a whole stand with Panasonics, plazma and lcd, showing the same NatGeo feed.
PZ80 was the worst of them, worse than even any LCD there. The letters were not sharp and colors bleached. If i had to choose right there I'd go for PZ8 or LCD tbh.

Oh, and some more hard facts about plasma:
+ very low response time (0.001 ms ), as opposed to 4ms of a high grade lcd - is it true, btw, any one knows?
- very high energy consumption (385 Watt, twice as an LCD the same size)
- weighs x2 times more than LCD (Samsung LCD 856 is 18kg, Panasonic's PZ80 is 43kg)

I doubt that the plasma was set up properly. It is a common issue with many generic display shops. LCd techology is getting close but cannot yet beat plasma overall. Recently a survey was conducted among consumers in 9 EU countries (including UK) and here is a summary of findings:

• Consumers believe that plasma provides the best quality viewing experience
in comparison to LCD
• Seeing is believing: Consumer opinions shifted dramatically when they
viewed the content in an environment which they largely considered to be
similar to their homes (watching TV in the evening)
• Plasma displays are deemed to be superior to LCD across all of the image
categories. Plasma outscored LCD by at least two to one across the areas
e.g., 63 per cent remarked that plasma provided the ‘best quality for
sharpness’ compared to 21 per cent for LCD
• Plasma scored particularly well with regard to black performance with close
to three-quarters (71 per cent) commenting that the technology delivered
the ‘best black quality’
• ‘Colour’ and ‘contrast’ metrics were also strong assets for plasma: 67 per
cent and 64 per cent of respondents remarked that the displays provided the
best quality in these areas

[covdude]

power eh, interesting.

so if you watch say 6 hours a day of tv on a new plasma and lcd 42 inch say, what will be the yearly cost for both on average or roughly ?

anyone care to calculate as i have upto now not considered this eventhough im in front of the tv loads !

vmt


Steve

[Panavision]

What about black levels? Which LCD is comparable to the Pio or the Pana?

[-Ad-]

Roughly taken from HDTV Test:

LCD - Sony W4000 = 120W = 0.12 kW
PLASMA - Panny PZ81 = 320W = 0.32kW

6hrs per day use = 2190hrs per year

LCD
263 kWh

Say 18p per kWh, gives £47 per year

Plasma
700 kWh

Same 18p per kWh gives £126 per year

This is all under assumed figures and 6hrs every day of the year during peak daytime hours, so will obviously be less for most people.

I for one don't care as £35pm electricity for me is fine (We have no gas), and picture quality matters most. But I will pay even more with a 50

Originally Posted by Panavision

What about black levels? Which LCD is comparable to the Pio or the Pana?

No LCD comes close to the 9G Pio, and the next best is the Pio LX 8G set and the XD. Panny sets are apparently comparable to the latest sony LCDs, but I cannot honestly say without seeing them together in a pitch black room and fully calibrated. Tests on HDTV Test say one thing but I prefer to trust my eyes.

[joshua_bond]

The 9g are good but the trouble is they don't come in under 50"....to fit in the average size household..

[-Ad-]

Originally Posted by joshua_bond

The 9g are good but the trouble is they don't come in under 50"....to fit in the average size household..

I have my 50 in a small 2 bed London flat.

Trust me, tvs shrink once you have had them for a few months

But obviously some households will have quite think lounges and awkward layouts, so a 50 might be a bit overpowering.

[gizlaroc]

Originally Posted by Panavision

What about black levels? Which LCD is comparable to the Pio or the Pana?

None.

They just aren't there yet. There is backlit led panels but they annoy me and the response time is delayed to process it, so not great if you like games.

There is a very fine line between accepable black levels and not, imho all the panny plasmas are the right side of that line, I have yet to see an LCD that is.


Something to mention here though, it really does depend on the viewing enviroment. During the day my Samsung 756 LCD actully looked like it had deeper blacks than the plasma, but as the night draws in and you start to have lamps on around the room that switches, the plasma looks darker than during the day and the LCD starts to show the glow from its screen on dark scenes.

That is all a case of how dark you can get the glass on the front, if you get a deep glass on the front you will get it to look darker with light in the room, however you have to drive the panel harder, this is why the new LCDs have contrast ratios of 70,000:1. Contrast ratio has nothing to do with black level, what we really need to see on the spec sheet is light output when showing black, although most of the LCDs dim the back light when there is alot of black on screen, so you get this fluctuating luminance all the time, which is another annoyance.

For me as long as I can get my screens blacks to go down below the point I find acceptable I don't worry about it, what I will say is only 2 screens that I have seen/owned have done this so far, the Pansonics and the Kuros.

Unfortunately, because they are so light sensative going into a store the darker glassed LCDs with there over driven white levels will trick you into thinking their blacks are better, and it is human nature to then seriously believe that your black levels are better than the plasmas as you saw it with your own eyes.

Same with sharpness and smoothness, LCDs in shops look like pixelated messes most of the time, as they are being overdriven, so the people who buy the plasma write them off.

The only way to tell is buy both and try both, keep the one you like best.

[gizlaroc]

Originally Posted by joshua_bond

The 9g are good but the trouble is they don't come in under 50"....to fit in the average size household..

What about the new Pansasonic 42 PF11, 1080p commercial panel??

I think I may order one of these, I love my PHD8 but after having the 1080p LCD realise that I am missing out on detail.

I nearly ordered a Pioneer panel yesteday, but I do that with every new model, can't get on with it and then sell it looses loads of money and causing myself a load of hassle.

[punkymunky]

Originally Posted by gizlaroc

What about the new Pansasonic 42 PF11, 1080p commercial panel??

I think I may order one of these, I love my PHD8 but after having the 1080p LCD realise that I am missing out on detail.

I nearly ordered a Pioneer panel yesteday, but I do that with every new model, can't get on with it and then sell it looses loads of money and causing myself a load of hassle.

Good move, after a week of ups and downs with my new Bravia LCD, I have concluded that my panasonic plasma under normal viewing conditions is still significantly better.

[Stone Free]

Originally Posted by -Ad-

Roughly taken from HDTV Test:

LCD - Sony W4000 = 120W = 0.12 kW
PLASMA - Panny PZ81 = 320W = 0.32kW

6hrs per day use = 2190hrs per year

What about the fact Plasmas energy output varies with the scenes light content? I think it would be interesting to measure the electricity used by those TVs (calibrated of course) over the course of the same film.

[-Ad-]

Originally Posted by Stone Free

What about the fact Plasmas energy output varies with the scenes light content? I think it would be interesting to measure the electricity used by those TVs (calibrated of course) over the course of the same film.

Just a rough test, but as I have said it is probably an overestimate for most people, especially as that is for 6hrs a day.

Also the figure for the plasma from HDTV Test seems to be the average rating, but who knows how they measured it. Probably with a meter plugged into the wall, but I'm not sure.

A plasma definately uses more power, but then each has its own problems. I for one oculd never have an LCD as a main tv, the viewing angles alone annoy me greatly, and just the inability to match the blacks in a dark room does the same. People might go on about the new LED sets being the Kuro killers, but from what I have seen they arn't. Black black is one thing, but getting the correct idling level and good shadow detail is another.

For me its always a plasma as a large screen for tv and films with some gaming, and an LCD for a kids tv, hardcore gaming set, or HTPC/PC monitor.

[Sonic67]

Originally Posted by Costas

I doubt that the plasma was set up properly. It is a common issue with many generic display shops. LCd techology is getting close but cannot yet beat plasma overall. Recently a survey was conducted among consumers in 9 EU countries (including UK) and here is a summary of findings:

You mean this?

Consumers Choose Plasma Over LCD in Side-by-Side Tests - Pioneer UK

http://www.plasma-lcd-facts.eu/home/

The research, which was commissioned by Panasonic and ourselves, surveyed random consumers in France, Germany and the UK.

Not that recently. It's a two year old survey (it first appeared November 2006.), and was commissioned by plasma screen manufacturers so not independent either. Amazingly the survey commissioned by plasma manufacturers concluded plasma was better. Who knew? Also the screens were oddly left on default settings and no details as to what TVs were used. So no chance of seeing if it was a decent plasma versus a supermarket special either.

Objectives and Methodology

The screens were watched in default settings, seats were positioned two to three metres from the displays in a central position and light conditions were of 50lux brightness with no daylight or neon lamps allowed in the room. The brand name of each TV was covered to ensure that preferences for particular manufacturers didn’t influence the feedback.

From the sound of it they found an LCD that looked poor out of the box and set it against a plasma that looked good out of the box. Why do that? Everyone sets their TV to look their best. All very suspicious. Anyway the survey was two years ago, commissioned by plasma screen manufacturers and 'unusual', so not going to be relevant now anyway. The LCD TV is still shown as going up to 37". Plasma screen fanboys still refer to it every few weeks.

Find a recent independent survey and you might have something.

In 2007 an episode of The Gadget Show took a plasma screen and an LCD screen set them up and then left various ordinary people to gravitate to which TV they prefered.

Plasma vs LCD | The Gadget Show | News | Throng

When they have made their choices – Suzi a plasma and Jason an LCD – a group of football fans is gathered and a fake pitch assembled. The screens are then placed at either end of the pitch as goals, and the machine that attracts the highest viewing figures is crowned the ultimate flatscreen.

The people split 50-50. Odd as you'd have thought if there was a major difference it would be noticed. I've still yet to see anyone do a proper independent survey.

[Costas]

Originally Posted by Sonic67

You mean this?

Consumers Choose Plasma Over LCD in Side-by-Side Tests - Pioneer UK

http://www.plasma-lcd-facts.eu/home/

I was not aware of that. Received it as an attachment from an ex-colleague in Germany who mentioned that this had appeared in German AV magazine and covered 9 countries and done by an EU body

[covdude]

thanks for working that out, yet even more to consider now !!

steve

[zzz]

Originally Posted by gizlaroc

No they haven't!! Worst sounding TV I have ever heard!!

Sound from my PX60 is just plain gorgeous - over headphones, AKG K501. Do you know if it is the speakers that are lousy or the whole subsystem?

[gizlaroc]

Sounds like the speakers to me, sure through headphones it will be fine.

[zzz]

I have old Panasonic PX60 for living and I wanted something different for my bedroom to replace CRT. I went for LE37A686. 100Hz, FullHD, but guess what - PX60 wipes the floor with it, even after the picture settings from hdtvtest site. Works great as HTPC monitor though.

Now, it's PX60's turn to get upgraded, if at all possible. To minimize the risk of getting something worse, I will just go for PZ80. Even the sound on headphones is simply amazing, and that is what I use the most.

Somehow, LCDs look so much better than plasmas in the stores, but I am not believing my eyes under those conditions any more .

[zzz]

Originally Posted by gizlaroc

Sounds like the speakers to me, sure through headphones it will be fine.

Bad news - it's not (only) speakers. I plugged in AKG K501 into LE37A686 and sound has even audible distortions. I was not even sure it's stereo. It takes probably 1$ to make descent audio output on a TV! I am done with Samsung forever (and LCDs for another couple of years).

[James Baker]

Originally Posted by Sonic67

You mean this?

Consumers Choose Plasma Over LCD in Side-by-Side Tests - Pioneer UK

http://www.plasma-lcd-facts.eu/home/

The research, which was commissioned by Panasonic and ourselves, surveyed random consumers in France, Germany and the UK.

Not that recently. It's a two year old survey (it first appeared November 2006.), and was commissioned by plasma screen manufacturers so not independent either. Amazingly the survey commissioned by plasma manufacturers concluded plasma was better. Who knew? Also the screens were oddly left on default settings and no details as to what TVs were used. So no chance of seeing if it was a decent plasma versus a supermarket special either.

Objectives and Methodology

The screens were watched in default settings, seats were positioned two to three metres from the displays in a central position and light conditions were of 50lux brightness with no daylight or neon lamps allowed in the room. The brand name of each TV was covered to ensure that preferences for particular manufacturers didn’t influence the feedback.

From the sound of it they found an LCD that looked poor out of the box and set it against a plasma that looked good out of the box. Why do that? Everyone sets their TV to look their best. All very suspicious. Anyway the survey was two years ago, commissioned by plasma screen manufacturers and 'unusual', so not going to be relevant now anyway. The LCD TV is still shown as going up to 37". Plasma screen fanboys still refer to it every few weeks.

Find a recent independent survey and you might have something.

In 2007 an episode of The Gadget Show took a plasma screen and an LCD screen set them up and then left various ordinary people to gravitate to which TV they prefered.

Plasma vs LCD | The Gadget Show | News | Throng

When they have made their choices – Suzi a plasma and Jason an LCD – a group of football fans is gathered and a fake pitch assembled. The screens are then placed at either end of the pitch as goals, and the machine that attracts the highest viewing figures is crowned the ultimate flatscreen.

The people split 50-50. Odd as you'd have thought if there was a major difference it would be noticed. I've still yet to see anyone do a proper independent survey.

Heres a report from an LCD buyers guide and guess what - plasma has the advantage

LCD TV vs Plasma TV Which is Best? from LCD TV Buying Guide

As for using the gadget shows garbage test is just laughable

the 50/50 decision was used because they didnt want to offend anyone (buyers and manufacturers) - If you believe the gadget shows tests I wish you a very happy belated birthday for yesterday

[Sonic67]

Originally Posted by Baldybouncer

Heres a report from an LCD buyers guide and guess what - plasma has the advantage

LCD TV vs Plasma TV Which is Best? from LCD TV Buying Guide

I first saw that site a few years ago. It was one of the sites I visited when I was buying a TV. Not sure what you mean by ‘advantage’ either. It puts the LCD as better for computer use and video gaming, brightly lit rooms, and there's no worries about burn in. (I would have thought that alone would date the link a bit. You linked to it.)

Anyway here's a link to the site here (5th April 2005) :

Plasmatvbuyingguide.com: biased?

Here's someone linking to that page in April 2006 (so again still older than the survey quoted above):

Buzzing LCD's

Again it's no more up to date than the plasma 'survey'. Not much help for someone buying a TV now.

Originally Posted by Baldybouncer

As for using the gadget shows garbage test is just laughable

the 50/50 decision was used because they didnt want to offend anyone (buyers and manufacturers) - If you believe the gadget shows tests I wish you a very happy belated birthday for yesterday

The random people picked made the decision. Are you suggesting the whole thing was a fix? Perhaps that they were all friends of the producer that were bribed to split 50/50? Why bother doing the test in the first place? Why not just have the presenters say they are good as each other and leave it at that? Also what do you mean ‘they didn’t want to offend anyone’? They are constantly giving products poor reviews. Are you saying it was just in this case?

If you believe the decision made was fixed please show me something called ‘proof’. A link to a site or something will do for starters. Otherwise this is coming across as a whole lot of sour grapes and some wild and possibly libellous speculation from you.

You have put a lot of faith in a plasma survey that was commissioned by plasma manufacturers, so obviously fair and neutral then, but no faith at all in the Gadget show which could see no difference so it must have been ‘fixed’. Hmm I wonder if they had said plasma was better. Would you have agreed with it then or still say the same?

Oh and my birthday is in June if it helps.

Besides all these surveys do is work in big generalisations. One plasma vs one LCD. It’s like saying which is better, petrol or diesel? I don’t know, are you talking about a petrol powered 2CV against a diesel powered Jaguar, or a petrol powered Ferrari against a diesel powered Toyota Aygo? Rather than focus on plasma v LCD you are better off ignoring the issue and looking at what’s a good TV. There are duff LCDs and duff plasma’s and there are good LCDs and good plasmas.

The best survey would be what is the best plasma at the moment for a certain price versus what’s the best LCD for a certain price. Have the survey independent and have the TVs both set up correctly and showing a wide variety of sources and inputs. The only people I’ve found who have done that was The Gadget Show and some magazines, which then tend to find little difference but you dismiss that as ‘well they must be biased then’.

[WATTS]

The trouble is reading through posts on this forum and seperating the fanboys of a particular technology (lcd or plasma) from those that are trying to be helpful.

As i have both plasma and LCD and seen plenty of them in shops and at friends houses i can honestly say (without prejudice) that plasma looks better. More natural, better blacks and no motion blur!

I do my reasearch before i make any purchase and i browsed these very forums last year looking for the exact same anwser to your question.
Bottom line then was that plasma has the edge over lcd from what members here posted.

My dad who is 54 years old tried to tell me LCD is better and he knows nothing about computers, TV's HD, or anything technology wise and i tried to put him straight yet he bought an LCD TV anyway...

He now has it on his wall in his bedroom and unfortunately for him my plasma blows it away!!!

Im not saying LCD is rubbish at all but if you have any doubt try going to a really good retailer who will setup a blu ray source on both tv's (LCD / Plasma) and see if you can notice the differences enough to make you decide.

I hope this has helped you out.

[gizlaroc]

Originally Posted by Sonic67

The random people picked made the decision. Are you suggesting the whole thing was a fix?

They said that they pulled them out of the box, set them to the defalut settings and let people decide.

Now in that case I'm surprised the plasma got a single vote, let alone 50%.

Out of the box plasma look awful, because they have to be overdriven so you can actually see them in a store.


That to me makes the test null and void.

[YellowSphere]

As has already been said, comparisons have to be made between particular sets. Even if you compare the best plasma to the best LCD, you can't prove that it's the different display technology that is making the difference over say, processing, or the colour filter.

So again, you have to compare sets directly, throwing most specification and technology differences out of the window, when you make your decision.