Quantcast

2013: Plasma's Last Stand?

showofdeth

Active Member
I've owned 2 different models and make of plasma TV in the past couple of months and both have had image retention and burn in. To say that those two problems are a thing of the past is just plain ridiculous and flat out wrong! Didn't even take much to happen. Definitely won't be purchasing another once my latest packs in.
 

Blackbartblues

Active Member
You are crazy to use a plasma as a computer monitor. Your set will be IR-ed to the max in no time. I doubt it's worth it especially if there are those other issues you mentioned.
All these people saying about image retention when using a plasma as a PC monitor - how eye-poppingly bright do you have your TVs set!?

I used my 42G20 for 18 months as a PC monitor for general browsing/FPS games/movies in THX mode with a few small colour adjustments. When switching from a couple of hours use with the desktop to a 2.35:1 image for films I could see a tiny amount of IR where the task-bar was, which would disappear after less than a minute.

The worst retention I ever get with it is when I mess about with my Denon AVR1910 menus/run audessey etc., because the menus are white text on a black background. Even that disappears after a max of 2 minutes.

Oh and of course the image was fine with the desktop and far superior than LCD for the gaming/movies
 
Last edited:

Kalos Geros

Active Member
That's a rather spurious argument, and I can't understand why you'd see convergence as a bad thing personally.
You're talking about convenience, when you say convergence, not quality of performance...

When converging you are always sacrificing something...LCDs don't play jack-of-all-trades any better then plasmas...if you choose LCD you will have artificial picture, excessive motion blur, bad viewing angles, tinted and cloudy blacks, which is all very good if you are web surfing, text editing etc because those failings don't matter :D...but if you want to enjoy accurate video and fast games, plasma is better in most cases...

convergence is OK if perfomance is of no great consequence...but since some people want (or at least they pretend to want) to watch film content in as accurate manner as possible, they will choose plasma because LCD is just a lousy compromise they accept to be able to use their PC with it...there is nothing wrong with that, but at least don't pretend then and turn a blind eye on the fact that you didn't get the display technology that will also do films and videos justice...

Iv read that text can be blurred with windows 7 on Plasma sets
Not from my experience - if you set the resolution right (1920x1080), eliminate overscan in gfx card driver and use progressive scan modes...
 
Last edited:

Har-One

Member
Great read Mark.:smashin:

I agree with most of it. Plasma might not disappear but it is having a tough time and it does not seem to get better. It is hard to predict technology. Plasma may go but it seems that this year there is no going to be challenging the zt and f8500. I saw the sony 85'' 4K at the bristol show and I was not very impressed. They might be using the tri luminous technology but might well be tetra, penta or hex luminous still at that humongous price there were problems with light uniformities. However I will wait for reviews and users comments to decide for one technology or another.
 

zekepliskin

Novice Member
You're talking about convenience, when you say convergence, not quality of performance...
True, but something gaining popularity as a result of convienience doesn't mean the quality is terrible. Look at smartphone cameras: at first they were a joke with less than VGA resolution and terrible cheap sensors leading to washed out, artifacted pictures. After some years of refinement it is now possible to take excellent pictures on the better quality ones, especially if you know how to adjust settings on the device and do a little post production later.

We can liken this to how LCD panels have improved - certainly the blacks aren't as deep as a good plasma and motion suffers a tad if you don't have, say, a 200Hz panel, but we can't take an LCD panel set to "showroom saturation" levels with the sharpness down and all the colours blown out and compare it with a CalMan adjusted plasma and call it a fair test.

A properly adjusted LCD will hold it's own against a properly adjusted plasma - it won't beat it but to most people's eyes it will not be far enough off the quality level to justify the price difference. Only quality hounds like a fair percentage of the people here (myself included) will really care that much about the difference. As I pointed out in my example, most people don't even do basic calibration on their LCDs, so them dropping more money on a plasma and then not calibrating that either is an even bigger waste, don't you think?

When converging you are always sacrificing something...LCDs don't play jack-of-all-trades any better then plasmas...if you choose LCD you will have artificial picture, excessive motion blur, bad viewing angles, tinted and cloudy blacks, which is all very good if you are web surfing, text editing etc because those failings don't matter :D...but if you want to enjoy accurate video and fast games, plasma is better in most cases...
LCD TVs are excellent jack-of-all-trades - your stereotypical mid-range one will do a variety of things to a good standard, while a plasma will do a few things incredibly well and not be very good at others.

Incidentally I don't know what kind of LCD panels you've been looking at but with correct colour temperature and turning off the dreaded "soap opera" effect post-processing, as well as picking a panel which can sync to a player's refresh rate etc you can get impressive results. Once again I'm not saying LCDs can beat plasmas, because in my experience they can't and don't. I'm saying they're not a poor man's substitute for one if they're set right, that the gap isn't as wide as you're making it out to be. Modern ones have low latency - even budget models can get you under 20ms now. Other than slightly grayish blacks now and then most of the LCD panels I come across have excellent picture quality after a little setup.

convergence is OK if perfomance is of no great consequence...but since some people want (or at least they pretend to want) to watch film content in as accurate manner as possible, they will choose plasma because LCD is just a lousy compromise they accept to be able to use their PC with it...there is nothing wrong with that, but at least don't pretend then and turn a blind eye on the fact that you didn't get the display technology that will also do films and videos justice...
Yes but if you argue with that mindset technically you could say that watching Blu-ray content doesn't count as an "accurate" way of watching film content, one that "does it justice" and that only a 35mm (or a 70mm why not, if you can find one) projector dealing with film stock is accurate enough, that 1080p (a "mere" 2.1 megapixels) is too much of a compromise, that even DTS-HD doesn't measure up and so on. If a person's attitude is too purist then that's the logical conclusion. Because on the sliding scale of things, plasma isn't good enough if quality is the be-all end-all either.

Taking cheap shots at PCs doesn't help your cause either. A good modern HTPC can sync 720p and 1080p display modes at refresh rate to match the content and some of them have hardware deinterlacing abilities that match or exceed that found in top quality standalone Blu-ray players. nVidia is doing some great work with ION2 for example, and the amazing thing is that's just scratching the surface of what's out there now and what will be available in a few years time. And as I noted, an ancillary benefit of a HTPC is that it works well for light computing too. Once again I have to write I'm surprised you can't see the benefits and have zero respect for people who do things differently.

Not from my experience - if you set the resolution right (1920x1080), eliminate overscan in gfx card driver and use progressive scan modes...
What are you doing there? Are you saying that the setup makes all the difference when using a plasma as a PC monitor? Great. Because that's what I've been saying about LCDs all along... if you configure them correctly, the gap between them and a plasma is not that wide.

Perhaps you can gracefully step down from that rather tall horse you are astride now? ;)
 
Last edited:

Blackbartblues

Active Member
A properly adjusted LCD will hold it's own against a properly adjusted plasma - it won't beat it but to most people's eyes it will not be far enough off the quality level to justify the price difference.
Lots of interesting points in your post. However, equivalent models stacked against one another typically sees the plasma beating the LCD on price!
 

zekepliskin

Novice Member
Lots of interesting points in your post. However, equivalent models stacked against one another typically sees the plasma beating the LCD on price!
Thanks for the kind words.

Depends on how you buy I guess... I can't see anyone picking up a brand new plasma for under £300, assuming the smallest size you can get, whereas I can (and did) get a competitive LCD for under £250, 3 HDMIs, surprisingly superb screen uniformity etc. If we're talking brand new models, brand new prices for a retailer type situation (I'd guess we are) I'll defer to your expertise though. :)
 

Kalos Geros

Active Member
@zekepliskin: You have no place to personalize this and address me like you do as if your opinions are universal truths...you are aggressive as if you are trying to make excuses for...something...

you can't get a 70mm copy instead of bluray, but you can get a plasma instead of LCD...so, just keep on watching your greatly improved LCD technology...goodbye , sir
 

zekepliskin

Novice Member
You have no place to personalize this and address me like you do as if your opinions are universal truths...you are aggressive as if you are trying to make exuses for...something...
Considering how disdainful of LCD technology you were, I'd say I was restrained and quite polite and apart from a quick sideswipe at the end of my post didn't make things personal.

I clearly admitted that you were right about plasma sets being better than LCD TV two or three times, but then rebutted the argument that LCDs were miles behind when they're not. Not being the best doesn't mean being the worst - that's a universal truth, most of the rest of what I said in the other post was subjective

If you have hurt feelings I apologise, that wasn't my intention. I was just trying to balance an opinion at one end of the scale (yours) with one closer to the middle (mine).

you can't get a 70mm copy instead of bluray,
Use of exaggeration to make a point - you more or less stated outright "only plasmas are the best way to watch film content" and so I replied "why not watch original 35mm film transfers with a projector, or better yet 70mm ones if you can get them?". There has to be an acceptable cutoff point otherwise even the best consumer equipment won't measure up to impossibly high standards, that's all I was saying.

I think you can get 70mm prints of Ben-Hur and Lawrence Of Arabia, but cheap they will not be. ;)

so, just keep on watching your greatly improved LCD technology
Greatly improved? Again, I've already admitted plasmas are better, just not for static content, lower power consumption, that they have image retention problems sometimes etc. I hate to keep flogging a dead horse here, but I was just addressing the balance in what I hoped was an amicable debate. Us Jews, we love to argue buddy, don't take it personally. :D
 

Kalos Geros

Active Member
I'm all aganst beating a dead horse, especially since plasma tech is probably going to become one...for all the wrong reasons...but hey, it's progress, right?
 

vaktmestern

Banned
The consumers want brighter picture and better design thats why plasma is fading away into oblivion.....
 

Kalos Geros

Active Member
The consumers generally do want flashy things and trinkets, you're absolutely right there...

Better design has inherently nothing to do with a set being plasma or LCD...plasmas traditionally do tend to have more "industrial"/ utilitarian design, but making them less attractive steers consumers towards the more profitable products -> LCD sets...
 

zekepliskin

Novice Member
Odd argument Kalos... most plasmas and LCDs don't look vastly different in terms of exterior case design. Plasmas are usually a bit thicker but that's it in my experience.
 

Mr.D

Distinguished Member
Retailers make bigger margins on lcd than plasma. Thats the reason that LCD is "pushed" whilst salesmen generally spout stupid myths about plasma.

They want you to buy LCD because they make more money out of it, they don't care whether they offer you the best bang for your buck in picture quality terms or not.

This happens at every link in the consumer chain from the manufacturer right to the retailer.

The sheeple buy into it because they are not after superior picture quality they are after validation of their consumer decisions.
 

Kalos Geros

Active Member
Odd argument Kalos... most plasmas and LCDs don't look vastly different in terms of exterior case design. Plasmas are usually a bit thicker but that's it in my experience.
Many reviewers also find plasma design "en general" to be less attractive than LCD design, at least until recently...true, thin LCD/LED panels do allow for more elegant TV case designs...
 

zekepliskin

Novice Member
Retailers make bigger margins on lcd than plasma. Thats the reason that LCD is "pushed" whilst salesmen generally spout stupid myths about plasma.

They want you to buy LCD because they make more money out of it, they don't care whether they offer you the best bang for your buck in picture quality terms or not.

This happens at every link in the consumer chain from the manufacturer right to the retailer.

The sheeple buy into it because they are not after superior picture quality they are after validation of their consumer decisions.
Yeah, that and the fact they won't research who will make the best panel for the size and price range they are looking at. So they might end up stuck with some lesser brand just because the profit margin is higher for the sales team.
 

zekepliskin

Novice Member
Many reviewers also find plasma design "en general" to be less attractive than LCD design, at least until recently...true, thin LCD/LED panels do allow for more elegant TV case designs...
They all look equally as thin when viewed from the front. ;)

Seriously, I don't get the obsession with completely thin screens, even if you're wall mounting. It's just a BS sales point which adds nothing. Humans are stupidly led by their visual perceptions in cases where it doesn't matter as much as they think it does. I know that might sound silly to say when we're discussing the picture quality of TVs, but I honestly think people go along the lines of "it looks better because it's thin" rather than "it looks better because the picture quality is superior". Idiots.
 

anotheruser

Standard Member
A great read (Y)

I am completely on the fence about whether to buy a Plasma or LCD. I use a HTPC and do a bit of web browsing, so I'm worried about IR and such. The extra power is also a cause for concern too. When I did purchase a Panasonic ST50B, I expected to be wowed with the technology and picture but was left feeling "that doesn't look too special". Yes, the picture was the bog standard settings but I specifically watched Corpse Bride to check out those deeper levels but ended up sending it back. The final nail in the coffin was the annoying buzz on light scenes.

However it's those black levels and picture quality that is the primary concern when purchasing a new television.
 

Kalos Geros

Active Member
So you returned the ST50 for bad black levels and got a....what? How exactly did you compare the black levels to other TVs, and in what environment? picture quality and black levels on ST50 are objectively very good, but maybe you expected something else, something overly contrasted and overly bright?...I don't question your not liking the picture, it's only what you were expecting and what are your comparing it to?
 
Last edited:

Blackbartblues

Active Member
Retailers make bigger margins on lcd than plasma. Thats the reason that LCD is "pushed" whilst salesmen generally spout stupid myths about plasma.

They want you to buy LCD because they make more money out of it, they don't care whether they offer you the best bang for your buck in picture quality terms or not.

This happens at every link in the consumer chain from the manufacturer right to the retailer.

The sheeple buy into it because they are not after superior picture quality they are after validation of their consumer decisions.

Although I hated my time at Comet, this was not the case. Sure the advertising gumpf they gave us told all sales people that LED was the best thing ever, and many of them believed it because they had no real knowledge or interest in AV kit. However, they were happy for me to actually ask customers about their typical usage and guide them accordingly - I'd recommend certain LCD/LED sets over plasma if a customer was buying their TV for daytime viewing of kids programs in the conservatory, for example. They left me to do so because my knowledge of the products was better than the managers, plus I was good at selling the things that made them real profit - all those pointless extras (£80 HDMI leads, £300 wall brackets, Monster power centres etc.). I hated doing it but had little choice if I wanted to keep my job. At least I walked away from a sale knowing I'd sold the customer the best TV for their circumstances and budget that they could get!
 

Welsh Whirlwind

Well-known Member
As for Burn in/image retention. The green bar from my DVR's have left a gray shadow on the 2006, luckily you only see it with white/near white screens. And when I had a cable DVR the "TV GUIDE" bright red and white logo EXACTLY, and ALWAYS, in the middle of the top screen was always there, in a light shadow. Luckily it went away after getting TiVo.

Image retention on my VT30 is horrible. And well known NOW(and finally acknowledged, too late by Forum No-NOs) Luckily I am well trained. But many MANY 2011 Panny plasma owners have image retention that have turned into burn-in after less than a year of ownership. But "don't worry image retention and burn-in are a thing of the past". Yeah RIGHT. As a 2006 and 2011 Panny owner. Image retention issues WEREN'T a thing of the past, but is something you better pay attention to NOW.
Hear, hear.
 

zekepliskin

Novice Member
But "don't worry image retention and burn-in are a thing of the past". Yeah RIGHT. As a 2006 and 2011 Panny owner. Image retention issues WEREN'T a thing of the past, but is something you better pay attention to NOW
Exactly, and as most people are pretty casual with their use of tech, they are going to notice image retention and burn in way before the slightly lesser performance of blacks and slightly lower contrast range of a good quality LCD TV panel.

All it would take would be me leaving my HTPC on without screensaver for five or six hours (which I've done accidentally on my LCD TV) a few times, or perhaps a VM TiVo user to pause on a recording (because the TiVo doesn't dim/blank the screen) to ruin a good quality plasma TV panel. And most people don't want to worry about that, myself included.
 

Welsh Whirlwind

Well-known Member
Exactly, and as most people are pretty casual with their use of tech, they are going to notice image retention and burn in way before the slightly lesser performance of blacks and slightly lower contrast range of a good quality LCD TV panel.

All it would take would be me leaving my HTPC on without screensaver for five or six hours (which I've done accidentally on my LCD TV) a few times, or perhaps a VM TiVo user to pause on a recording (because the TiVo doesn't dim/blank the screen) to ruin a good quality plasma TV panel. And most people don't want to worry about that, myself included.
Exactly.
 

Blackbartblues

Active Member
Exactly, and as most people are pretty casual with their use of tech, they are going to notice image retention and burn in way before the slightly lesser performance of blacks and slightly lower contrast range of a good quality LCD TV panel.

All it would take would be me leaving my HTPC on without screensaver for five or six hours (which I've done accidentally on my LCD TV) a few times, or perhaps a VM TiVo user to pause on a recording (because the TiVo doesn't dim/blank the screen) to ruin a good quality plasma TV panel. And most people don't want to worry about that, myself included.

You're saying that people shouldn't need to worry about using their TV in the correct manner i.e. switch the thing off when not in use. That is ridiculous - whether or not the source remains running (PC, Sky box on pause etc.) - a TV provides you with a massive indication that it is on and burning a whole ton of energy when not being used, as it produces an image :facepalm:
 

Welsh Whirlwind

Well-known Member
You're saying that people shouldn't need to worry about using their TV in the correct manner i.e. switch the thing off when not in use. That is ridiculous - whether or not the source remains running (PC, Sky box on pause etc.) - a TV provides you with a massive indication that it is on and burning a whole ton of energy when not being used, as it produces an image :facepalm:
Not at all. He is saying that it is extremely easy to say, fall asleep infront of the TV, something that happens to thousands of people, and not expect to have buy a new set because of it.

Also, the problems I experienced from Plasma tech had nothing to do with mis-use. It just simply burned the BBC logo from normal viewing on a calibrated TV, with all the 'pixel-shift' etc protection settings maxed-out.

That's a £1000 TV ruined within one year. It's disgraceful.
 

Similar threads

Trending threads

Latest News

Panasonic launches SC-HTB600 and SC-HTB400 soundbars
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Panasonic launches HX940, HX900 and HX800 4K LCD TVs for 2020
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Elipson launches 3230 loudspeaker at Bristol Hi-Fi Show
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 17th February 2020
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Top Bottom