46" to 50" TV recomendations, Gaming, HD &3D

addinuff

Standard Member
Hi there, long time viewer and first post :)

I'm after a 46" or 50/51" TV for the following reasons......

I'd like the 3D for movies/Sky and Sports via Sky HD/PS3 inc BlueRays
I aslo play games on the PS3 and have a Wii (but thats not important)
Would also be good for the internet (BBC iPlayer etc....)

I've been set on the Panasonic ST 50" for a few weeks now (Just waiting for the post xmas sales to buy) however after reading/seeing other TV's I'm totally confused now :(

My room setup means I'd be 6-8ft away from the TV and lighting is normal, in that no direct sunlight and a standard ambient lighing in the room. I intend to mount the TV on the wall above the fireplace (which is never used) and run 3x 1.4 HDMI up, std coxaial, Cat5 and 3x Wii wires.

Like I said I had my heart set on the ST30 and was in my budget of £800, however the Samsungs I see in the shop are amazing and look more vibrant to me (LED a lot birghter??) and the Smart Hub also looks good, plus the store people are scaring me about screen burn (I watch Sky Sports News, Sky News etc and games such as COD and GT5) and how it would leave lasting impressions on the plasmas. Also the LED backlit is newer tech and has a 0ms lag compared to the plasma ones (16ms on ST)

I was not sure if a, he didnt know, b, got bigger commision on Samsung or c, from experience thought the plasmas were rubbish comapred to LED.

Also confused over active and passive 3D, he said passive (samsung and LG) were much better than active, although active was full HD???

I have a 42" LCD Phillips at the moment and it suffers from motion blur on sports and SD is also rubbish, especially at close range! So dont want to make the same mistakes again :(

Help! Do I stick with the majority on here and go for the ST or do I need to dig more in to the LED sets, not sure and totally confused :lease:

Also can you reccomend any good 2.1 systems for £300 ish as I have run 2x speaker wires either side of the fireplace and I hear the speakers on new TV's are rubbish.

Sorry for long post but you are all doing me a massive favour and deciding what I watch on for the next 5 years :)
 
Last edited:

Furnace Inferno

Well-known Member
That salesman is an idiot, it's actually quite frustrating knowing how many people are out there spreading false information about tech because it stunts the growth of better tech in favour of the cheaper higher margin fluff.

Not to say that LCDs now, it just isn't the best tech for displaying moving images.

1st thing, only CRTs have no input lag which is why testing can be done measuring the difference between a timer being displayed on a CRT monitor and the display being tested. LCDs almost always have much higher input lag than plasma due to how the technology works. It takes the pixels in a plasma 0.0001ms to react which is why you never see response times advertised like with LCDs, where it takes the pixels anywhere from 2-8ms to react and this added on top of the time it takes the panel to display the image. All the dynamic dimming and motion interpolation that LCD LEDs use to improve the picture quality further increase input lag way over 100ms.

Just check the AVForum reviews to see the difference in input lag.

2. LCDs will always look more vibrant in the shop environment because there is so much ambient light and LCDs are able to go brighter, however in the home environment you will not need that much brightness unless you are also watching in an area with a lot of light. Even then you shouldn't use the dynamic modes they use in the shop.

3. Screen burn-in isn't really a problem on the Panasonic plasmas, although you will get some image retention, the recommendation is to be careful in the first 100-200 hours with HUDs and logos but after than you are good to go.

4. Active vs. Passive is a matter of preference, one gives higher resolution and the other no crosstalk and more brightness. With that being said crosstalk on the Pannies isn't much of a problem, but with LCD's it is, though they are able to give a brighter image so again it is a matter of preference.
 

addinuff

Standard Member
Just worried about screen burn on the st30. If someone can ease my fears then I think i will buy it. Although the lg passive sets are a close second after seeing them.
 

vickster

Distinguished Member
You may get image retention, highly unlikely to get burn. However, if worried get the LED - take rough with smooth. No perfect TV, trade off of compromises
 

leedebs

Well-known Member
Just worried about screen burn on the st30. If someone can ease my fears then I think i will buy it. Although the lg passive sets are a close second after seeing them.
For 3d I would say passive is the way forward IMO but I was after a 2d display first & foremost & as I watch mainly 2d & for that I would say Plasma is the most preferred option for pic quality
IMO the ST30 is very lcd like in 2 ways
1) It has a very good A/R filter that allows viewing in most ambient conditions
2) Using a picture mode such as Photo with Cool colour balance I think it looks as bright as a an lcd
Combined together then watching this TV is a real pleasure, lcd brightness and punch with nice clean whites and good contrast in all conditions, also turn out the lights and it brings all plasma advantages to the table, excellent blacks and detail, good motion and smooth natural colours and contrast.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Panasonic HZ2000 OLED TV Review: The best OLED for movie viewing in 2020
Top Bottom