Guys,

First time here ....

I understand there are a few different types of technology such as LCD, DLP & Plasma and used in both flat panel and rear projection. Before deciding which technology I'd prefer I like to weight any disadvantages of a rear projection to that of a flat panel. Are there any disadvantages to a rear projection (say LCD) to a flat panel LCD besides it's size and price? Am I loosing picture quality with a rear projection versus a flat panel. Is there more maintance required with a rear projection?

These are few questions I was hoping someone could help me out with. Thanks guys

Raz

Is there no one who can offer feedback about this??

Raz

LCD Rear Projection. Personally I think they have quite fundamental picture quality issues with the rendering of blacks and colours can look false, especially skin tones. I prefer a CRT rear projection. One advantage of LCD rear projections is that they don't suffer from screen burning issues so for games consoles this is potentially a better option.

DLP. The new technology, most are raving about the LG box. They are quite compact at about 300 or so deep but I have some problems with the picture. It seems amazing to me that in effect things have come full circle because this system uses a colour wheel to generate colour - a method used way back when colour images were first seen. Picture quality is a bit of an acquired taste because it does have some strange characteristics - most notably the slightly frosted look to the generated image. There are also some issues with fast moving scenes - you can actually see red - green - blue in some cases, although I must point out the effect is momentary. The set, like normal RPTV is sweet spot dependent - you have to be on line with the set to the the picture at it's best. Another problem is the light that generates the picture has to be replaced regularly - it's quoted as 5,000 hours but I'd be surprised that any bulb can stay pure white that long, or actually stay alive that long bearing in mind how hot it gets. I'd me more inclined to say 2-3000 max. Prices for these bulbs are pretty high too, about £200-300.

Plasma. In theory this one should be the one to take over from CRT because it is a spontaneous light source just like CRT is. But it won't because it has two fundamental issues. First is the extraordinary speed of permanent screen burn, which can happen in as little as one hour if you're not careful with a games console for example. The second is they are very fragile and average lifespan is only about 2-300 hours before it is pretty much toast - a pretty brief life for something so expensive. Image quality on all but the very best is not good either - only Pioneer and Panasonic seem to do plasmas with anything like a decent picture that I have seen.

LCD. The most popular flat panel technology out there. It uses a series of cold cathode lamps firing through an LCD matrix to generate a picture. Biggest disadvantage is that true black is impossible because it is a backlit source. Off axis viewing can be a bit hit and miss too because the tonal balance of the picture changes as you view the various filters from different angles. This and the true black problem also applies to LCD rear projections. Image quality on a good one is quite good - possibly better than the other flat panel technologies available at present.

If I was buying a flat panel now I'd pick LCD because it seems to give a better picture and is more reliable than plasma. But I'm not buying now because compared to normal CRT the image quality of all the new technologies sucks. Too many digital artefacts, a lack of natural colour rendering and poor reliability are also factors that stop me buying flat panel - for now. But next year could be different. I'm waiting to see SECD (SED), Toshiba's new flat panel built with Canon, which is due out next year according to web sources. This, on paper, has all the attributes of CRT without the inherent drawbacks of size, weight and geometry issues. If it is this good, and also avoids the issues that have plagued LCD and plasma then both of them are dead in the water.

[cerebros]

Originally Posted by Laurel&Hardy

If I was buying a flat panel now I'd pick LCD because it seems to give a better picture and is more reliable than plasma. But I'm not buying now because compared to normal CRT the image quality of all the new technologies sucks. Too many digital artefacts, a lack of natural colour rendering and poor reliability are also factors that stop me buying flat panel - for now.

CRT isn't without it's own problems. Poor geometry can be a showstopper as most sets don't have enough adjustment options to cure it bad alignment, or else the problem is with manufacture in the first place (which I had with 3 JVC HV32P37's). Processing problems are just as likely on current CRT sets as on plasma/LCD. As for reliability, you only have to read threads on these forums to see that ALL the types of display have problems.

Personally I'm looking towards LCD flat panel for my next display - I'm prepared to trade off a not quite perfect black level for perfect geometry, decent connectivity, no screen burn issues, and HDTV compatibility via component or digital input.

[red16v]

I am a big fan of crts, I have seen quite a few Plasma/LCD wide screens with professional test signals on them as well as broadcast pictures. For my money plasma by far and away beats LCD. Many people stress the 'burn in' problems with plasmas - provided you ensure that you don't overdo brightness and contrast for the first 2-300 hours then a normal domestic viewer should encounter no problems. For plasma screen burn to occur you would have to have a static image on it for many many hours for it to occur - very unlikely in a domestic environment. I look at a number of different plasmas over many days/months and have never seen screen burn (except on one that had a static image on it for over 6 months). No doubt both plasma/lcd technologies will progress in time giving even further improvements in image display (according to the trade articles that I read dont write off plasma - lcd won't replace it in the short/medium turn) Just my opinion I know others will champion other technologies. Regards, yt.

[fatbob]

Up until Thursday I fell into the "plasma needs a few more years to develop and CRT still offers the best picture quality" camp.

However, that was until I saw a properly set up Panasonic 42PWD6. I went from being a CRT diehard to a plasma convert in about five seconds. While CRT does offer lovely pictures, and a well setup CRT rear projection TV leaves little to be desired, I would now never consider anything other than a plasma panel. The picture on a well setup PW6 looks very much like a very large, very high quality, CRT.

I had a couple of friends over who (like me) fell into the "plasma is crap" catagory, and they also couldn't believe the image quality. The big problem faced by plasma is that there are hardly any dealers who know how to set them up even remotely well, and that includes many of the higher end shops (my local Sevenoaks had a Fujitsu plasma rigged up to a Tag McLaren progressive scan dvd player, and the image quality was horrendous). This leads to many people writing off plasma as a contender in the image quality stakes. On top of this, there is a fair degree of variance in plasma performance, so that a well setup plasma from Thompson may not impress, while the Panasonic or Pioneer will blow your socks off.

I can't really comment on an LCD flat panel as a rival to plasma, as I've never had the chance to rig one up and set it up properly. I have setup a Sony Grand Wega LCD rear projection and the image quality on that was also fantastic. I would certainly have no complaints about owning one (although the black levels on the Sony were very weak, but that is something that afflicts all LCD displays) but I would put it behind the Panasonic plasma in terms of overall picture quality.

With the PW6 now available for well below the £2000 mark, which 42" screen to buy is a bit of a no-brainer to be honest. Forget all those grainy, smeary plasma pictures you've seen on the high street and prepare to be blown away.

If you want more detailed info on the PW6, just post your questions and I'll do my best to answer them.

Oh, and just incase you haven't noticed, I'm VERY happy with my new PW6. It has far exceeded my expectations .

[red16v]

Fatbob, I 'd agree with you on all your comments on the Panasonic - by far the best I've seen so far - if I wanted a 42" flatscreen it's the one I'd go for. Regards, yt.

[geese]

Hey fatbob

I own a Panasonic PD50 and the picture quality is absolutly amazing and detailed, how does PW6 look compared to PD50.

Wow, thanks for the fantastic replies! I've always been against plasma's for some reason. The picture never seemed to stand out unlike that of an LCD. I'll have to look into the PW6.

For a brief moment let's forget about which technology is behind the beutiful picture. Is there any specific reason I should prefer a flat panel over a rear projection?

For example, If I choose Sony LCD as my technology of choice. Would the picture quality differ on flat panel versus rear projection?

Raz

by the way,

Originally Posted by Laurel&Hardy

I'm waiting to see SECD (SED), Toshiba's new flat panel built with Canon, which is due out next year according to web sources.

What is SED and is it upcoming technolgy that other manufacters will offer?

Raz

[fatbob]

Originally Posted by geese

Hey fatbob

I own a Panasonic PD50 and the picture quality is absolutly amazing and detailed, how does PW6 look compared to PD50.

Hi Geese,

I've never had the chance to see a properly setup PD50, so unfortunately I can't compare the two sets, but I suspect that a well calibrated PW6 would win over many CRT diehards.

Cheers.

Originally Posted by Razmo

by the way,



What is SED and is it upcoming technolgy that other manufacters will offer?

Raz

Read the link below for some info about it...

http://www.canon.com/technology/deta...e/sed_display/

It looks real interesting. Potentially the killer blow to the two present formats Plasma and LCD because in theory it has none of their drawbacks. But we have to wait and see reality first before making a sound judgement, which apparently will be sometime next year, although one of the press releases below actually says mass production begins in 2007, so maybe we have to wait a while longer yet!! Read the press releases below for more info...

http://www.canon.com/press/p2004sep14.html

http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index....31;fp;2;fpid;1

[geese]

thanx for the reply fatbob