1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

LCD - What are the pitfalls?

Discussion in 'LCD & LED LCD TVs' started by Kazuya Mishima, Jun 16, 2003.

  1. Kazuya Mishima

    Kazuya Mishima
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    1,416
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    North East Scotland
    Ratings:
    +65
    The viewing angle on LCD TVs is quite narrow.

    Also the picture is quite "noisy" with a lot of "fizzing".

    On the plus side they are (I believe) lighter than plasma screens.

    Do a search or two, I am sure the differences are well-explained on these forums.
     
  2. Kazuya Mishima

    Kazuya Mishima
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    1,416
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    North East Scotland
    Ratings:
    +65
    Something dodgy's going on because I posted my last post at 9.13pm and this one at 9.15pm.....:confused:
     
  3. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,970
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    I own both a plasma and an LCD television.

    My LCD has more than 150 degrees viewing angle, which although not as good as plasma's 180 degrees in practical terms it's not far off.

    However, my main downside with LCD is the black level -- there isn't one, more dark grey. Also not as bright as plasma. Lower refresh rate. On the plus side not as hot and noisy as (some) plasmas. If you are worried about "dead pixels" they are less visible on a plasma than on a LCD screen.

    Personally, I like my blacks to be black and colours to be vibrant; but Mrs StooMonster banned me from second plasma (for the bedroom) so got LCD instead. However, as a second television I'm really pleased with it; suits it's purpose very well.

    StooMonster

    PS: This post is at 21:25 but server thinks it's at 04:25
     
  4. Kazuya Mishima

    Kazuya Mishima
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    1,416
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    North East Scotland
    Ratings:
    +65
    Sorry StooMonster I stand corrected!

    When I move house in the summer I (we!) are considering a groovy bedroom TV set-up. Ultimately I would like to put my current plasma in the bedroom and get a brand spanking new one for the lounge - but this won't be for a while yet.

    I'll be interested to see how the two technologies develop.

    My parents have seen LCD TVs in a shop window and are enthralled - however they don't have a critical eye and need some advice.

    Interesting to hear from someone who owns plasma AND LCD.
     
  5. elvisjnr

    elvisjnr
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Sharp LC30HV4E it's small compared to a 42 inch Panny, but what else lets it down? Is only the previously expensive price tag? Or are there other fundamental flaws in LCD tv's I should be aware of?
     
  6. wilber

    wilber
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2002
    Messages:
    1,970
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Ratings:
    +30
    I read a glowing review for the Sharp in a mag last week (don't know which, just flicking in Smiths). Popped into JL to have a look but I was unimpressed. Viewing angle is nowhere near 150 degrees unless you don't care that the image looks awful, no proper blacks and text looked terrible - loads of jaggies. Add to that a price tag of £3000+ and it adds up to not a good deal.
     
  7. LV426

    LV426
    Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    12,815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere in South Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +5,025
    Something odd......what has happened to the initial question?

    Anyhow - not all LCDs are equal.

    Viewing angle varies between sets, even from the same manufacturer. The Sharp Aquos 22 inch WS set has an excellent viewing angle in all 4 directions. So does my Samsung LW22A13. The Panasonic 22incher has a poor viewing angle in the vertical plane.

    Black levels vary although they are rarely as 'good' as CRTs. The Panasonic 15 and 22 inch WS sets have a clever scheme which reduces the brightness of the backlight on dark images which improves perceived contrast.

    Picture quality varies hugely, too. The Panasonic and Sharp 22inch sets have low resolution panels (852x480) which reduces definition. (Actually, this is the same structure as many of the cheaper plasmas. The Samsung 22 has a higher resolution (1280x720) which actually (subjectively) improves definition, and can produce an excellent image given a good source. It's quite forgiving of poor sources, too.

    Refresh rate - to say LCDs are poor is a misnomer. Refresh rate normally refers to flicker. LCDs don't flicker at al, irrespective of their refresh rate. What they can do, however, is suffer from image lag, meaning that fast moving objects can blur. Again, they aren't all the same. Newer models are getting faster all the time.

    They can suffer dead pixels. These rarely arise in use - they are a production defect. If you get a good one, it will almost certainly stay good.

    Anyhow, it wouldn't be fair to concentrate solely on the negatives. Offset against these are:

    - perfect geometry, convergence and stability (also true of plasmas)
    - complete absence of refresh rate flicker (only true of LCDs)
    - light and compact (also true of Plasmas)
    - no screen burn (only true of LCD and DLP - but DLP is only used as a projection technique - there aren't any direct view DLPs)
     
  8. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,970
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    Good points Nigel.

    When I refer to refresh rate on LCD, I am not refering to flicker caused by vertical refresh rate but the ability of the screen to update quickly.

    My LCD has 20ms response -- most LCDs are 40-45 ms -- but scrolling text jerks across the screen. Perhaps it's the internal scaler, but horizontal scrolling text is bad. Also LCD technology infamously has ghosting of fast moving objects.

    Nigel, you are correct to say that some LCDs are better than others.

    My LCD's resolution looks great and is 1280x768 which is not far off my plasma's 1366x768. It's bright too at 430cd/m^2, but most LCDs are 150-250; and my plasma is a very bright 500cd/m^2. My bedroom tv has an execptionally high contrast for LCD at 500:1, most are 250:1 or 300:1; whereas my plasma is 3000:1 and black really is black.

    One annoying factor of my LCD is that although it has component (YUV) inputs, and works with PAL or NTSC signals, it does not accept a progressive scan signal (unless you user a scaler via VGA input).

    As I said before, I'm really pleased with my LCD television -- it works well for my suited purpose (a widescreen flat panel television in my bedroom). But, in my experience of the display technologies around today, LCD will not give you a better picture than a (decent) plasma or CRT; however, they run cooler and quieter than plasmas. I have a reasonably large living room, and on these barmy summer nights the 50" plasma screen is keeping the room hot!

    StooMonster
     
  9. LV426

    LV426
    Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    12,815
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere in South Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +5,025
    All depends on what 'features' of a TV picture annoy you most. 'Better' to one person isn't necessarily 'better' to another. I dislike CRTs because (as well as their physical size, which doesn't affect picture quality)

    - most have some failing in geometry
    - most have some failing in convergence
    - most suffer voltage regulation bounce to an extent
    - 50hz sets have visible refresh rate flicker
    - most 100hz sets exhibit motion artefacts

    and, probably, none are free from all the above.

    whereas LCDs have relatively poor black levels. And black levels don't bother me personally as much as bad geometry, say. It really is a matter of opinion, and, of course, I don't automatically expect everyone else to share mine.
     
  10. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,970
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    Ooops, I was thinking more of computer displays than televisions there -- and I did say picture quality, not physical size.

    You are absolutely correct in your scathing points in regard to CRT television...

    ...but I think colour reproduction is another downside of LCD. Warning, huge generalisation following ... :devil:

    IMHO inaccurate reproduction of the entire colour range remains a limitation of LCD displays, particularly in difficult areas like flesh tones. Which is why "professional" design studios or post-production houses who require accurate colour reproduction for creative work still use CRT monitors -- like my Sony FW900 24" 16:10 widescreen CRT: which has excellent geometry and convergence, square pixels at small dot pitches, runs high resolutions at amazing refresh rates e.g. 2304x1440/80 or 1920x1200/98 (even has 1920x1080/72 for HDTV editing), but mostly because of accurate colour repoduction (this monitor even automatically corrects adverse influences from the Earth´s magnetic fields to provide excellent colour purity). Obviously accepting that these people's general office use may have LCD monitors.

    However, LCD monitors are getting better at full range colour reproduction, and even Sony are dropping CRTs and selling only LCDs. I was recently considering replacing my trusty FW900 with a Sony P232W 23" 16:10 widescreen LCD, but I remain unconvinced with colour reproduction. Link to Sony Monitors.

    That's not to say LCD's colour reproduction isn't good enough for home television use!

    My plasma has square pixels 1366x768 @ 16:9 and perfect geometry; because I changed it's overscan settings for YUV, and "snapped in" VGA input (it lacks DVI). Do rectangular pixels e.g. 1280x768 @ 16:9 also give perfect geometry? Or is that a red herring? Besides, isn't excellent geometry only achieved by changing defaults H&V settings on screen -- regardless of plasma, LCD, CRT?

    StooMonster
     
  11. muzz10

    muzz10
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I have the LCD/Plasma choice as well to make. Had pretty much decided on the Hitashi 32pd3000 Plasma for the lounge, main use as TV/music DVD viewing etc (Movies on projector). While checking the Hitashi out in JL I saw the new Sony 'floating' glass panel LCD KLV30MR1 TV and it is stunning. Def the super model of flat screen tv's. Although it's dissapointing to read the review of it in this months WV mag, they gave it a bit of a average review. They rate the new 30" sharp very highly, not sure if that's anything to do with all the advertising they get from sharp or the free-be trips for the editor to japan (read the editors page as he talks about it). Not fair as I'm sure it has an excellent picture and great tv as Sharp LCD tv's seem to be. Just a shame they haven't got anyone on there design team with the vision of the Sony creators, the Sharp looks too plastic and the speakers look too cheap looking for a £3000 TV.
    It's hard to judge if the LCD would be the right choice over Plasma for this use, ideally it would be best to buy it and test for a couple of weeks and return for the Hitashi if the picture wasn't right. If you know any shops that would do this arrangement then please post.

    ---------------------------------------------
    I was put on this earth to accomplish a certain number of things (inlc gadget buying) and I'm so far behind that I will never die.
     

Share This Page

Loading...