Quantcast

LG PW450 (42PW450T) 42 Inch HD Ready 3D Plasma TV Review

The News Bot

News Supplying Robot
Reviewed by Stephen Withers, 10th September 2011.
Overall the 42PW450 offers a competent 2D performance but given the presence of better 2D displays at this price, its main selling point is the inclusion of 3D. However the overall 3D performance just wasn't good enough, even at this price point and as such we would find it hard to recommend the 42PW450 for those wishing to take their first steps into the third dimension.
Read the full review...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

lungwun

Well-known Member
Hello Steve, Is it safe to say that this TV has the same performance in 3D content as the PZ950? And is it also safe to assume that a 3D score of 'Good' is more than enough to satisfy the average viewer who wouldn't know what a very good 3D picture looks like? I am such a buyer and i really couldnt afford a high-end 3D TV. I just stretched my budget from this to a 50PZ250t and i really cant afford to go any higher. Clarification on the weighting of your scores would be most appreciated. Thanks :)
 

Steve Withers

Reviewer
I didn't actually review the PZ950 but reading Mark's review it seems that the PW450's 3D performance is similar. I suspect that many 3D neophytes will be quite happy with the 3D performance of the PW450 but obviously I'm comparing it to the performance of many other 3D displays which are considerably better. However if you are operating on a budget and you want to get a taste of 3D then the PW450 certainly offers great value and as I said the 2D performance is actually very good. I'm just finishing my review of the 50" version of the PW450 and I found the out-of-the-box performance on that display to be better and I always find that 3D is more immersive on a larger screen so if you can stretch the budget I would recommend it.
 

lungwun

Well-known Member
Excellent recommendation Steve, Its just so confusing when you want to get into 3D but are constrained by your budget.

My budget currently stands at circa 600 quid. I see you reviewed the 47LD950 last year and i see that the 3D got some pretty good scores apart from the sequential part of it. The 47LD950 is currently 599 at richer sounds and a 2011 50PZ250T is 539 as well.

Is it advisable to go for a last year model with pretty good 3D performance or a current model with average performance?
You honest 'Reviewers' opinion on this would be greatly appreciated! :lease:
 

Steve Withers

Reviewer
That isn't such an easy question to answer because the LD950 is a LCD TV and uses passive 3D whilst the PZ and
PW are plasma TVs and use active shutter glasses. Personally I prefer a plasma for 2D images but I prefer passive for 3D because it tends to be free of flicker and crosstalk and the glasses are very cheap. I'd recommend trying to get a demo of the different type of TVs and the different approaches to 3D before you decide to commit yourself.
 

lungwun

Well-known Member
I'd recommend trying to get a demo of the different type of TVs and the different approaches to 3D before you decide to commit yourself.
My thoughts exactly, yesterday i went down to my local Curry's to try this out. However i could only try out the 3D on the passive sets and they were pretty good! the only active sets i could try out the 3D on were the high end Panasonic VT's and Samsung D8000.

I did see the 50PZ250t on display but when i asked a sales person, he said they had no glasses for me to try out the 3D content and went on to suggest i rather buy the 50PW450t as it was a higher, newer and better model than the PZ250t :suicide: what criteria do they use to employ these staff i wonder?

I will see if this model is present at my local richer sounds and if they at least have the pair of active shutter specs that come in the box.

Sorry for hijacking your thread, you have been of great help! :thumbsup:
 

Steve Withers

Reviewer
As a rule we don't post calibrated settings because those settings will be specific to the panel and the environment and thus using them could actually result in worse performance. In fact I'm just finishing a review of the 50" version of the PW450 and the out-of-the-box measurements were completely different to the 42" version which gives you an idea of how much variation you can get.

In another example, an unofficial study done on posted Kuro settings found that 90% of the time if you used those posted settings on another Kuro the results were no better or worse than the out-of-the-box settings.
 

deblee

Novice Member
Good review as usual Steve.
Would be interested in finding out what the 42C3B from Panasonic black level cd/m2 was
I've taken a punt on the newer TX-P42UT30 and hope this provides reasonable picture quality and as a bonus it also has 3D capability and Freeview HD + internet access etc all for £499 with 5 years warranty and free delivery (although you do not get any glasses included)
As an aside I quite liked the passive 3D (shame that they do not plasmas in this format) however my wife found the passive gave her a headache
For me I found active & passive very similar although the cost of glasses for active will probably put joe public off
 

deblee

Novice Member
One other thing Steve in what viewing environment are these tests done ie dim/dark or moderate lighting?
 

Steve Withers

Reviewer
I'm surprised that passive gave your wife a headache, it's usually the constant flickering of the active approach that causes headaches.

We take the measurements and do the most critical viewing in a darkened environment but we also watch material in all other conditions.

The UT30 seems to offer incredible value and hopefully we will be able to review one soon.
 

deblee

Novice Member
Yes I was surprised as well, other members of the family didn't like the passive one either (maybe it was the display model settings or something) comments ranged from "looks too false" to "poor quality".
For me however I thought it had more "wow" factor in the sense that the glasses were light (cheap as well) and you tended to forget you were wearing them, image wise both looked similar.
Though the best I have seen of any 3D was in Comet where they had a VT20 set up playing Avatar in 3D.....WOW:thumbsup: now I know the budget Panny isn't going to meet this expectation but as active ticked the boxes for the family and the 2D picture was of paramount importance I went for the Panasonic
Any idea of the cd/m2 figures for the 42C3B Panasonic?
 

Steve Withers

Reviewer
Sorry I don't have any black level measurements for the 42C3B.
 

Steve Withers

Reviewer
From memory I would say that C3 has superior blacks to the PW450 but I can't really comment on other models.
 

leedebs

Active Member
So side by side I would notice a difference against a budget Pansonic or Samsung in my batcave:D
btw Steve you mention that the LG uses last years menus, looking at the screenshots they are different from my 2010 PJ650 so I assume they are the latest ones for the budget range
Any chance you could chuck some photos on a usb drive and run them through the media player, the 2010 models had a bug that meant that all photos are displayed in the wrong aspect ratio (distorted & stretched to fill the screen) that made evrything fat, for example a circle was displayed as an egg shape

If the blacks are the same/similar to the PJ range of last year then it seems that LG don't place much importance on this aspect of the picture, shame really as in all other respects I think they have nailed it IMO
 

Steve Withers

Reviewer
I don't know what the menus look like on the PJ650 but the menus on the PW450 are definitely more like last year than this year.

I'm sure that LG place importance on black levels but Panasonic and Samsung just better.

I don't have the TV anymore so I'm afraid I can't check the aspect ratio of photos for you.
 

Steve Withers

Reviewer
Actually leedebs whilst I don't have the 42PW450 any more I realised that the 50PW450 hasn't been picked up yet so I checked some photos and the aspect ratio was fine, looks like LG have fixed that bug.
 

theo2

Standard Member
Hello Steve! Thank for very interesting review. Moreover I think about purchasing LG 42pw450 or 50pw450 so everything from your review is more important for me. Please can you tell me energy consumption is measured as average meaning average scene (both light and darker) and also average setting of energy saving ? I'm just looking for to your review of 50" model. What is your opinion to optimal watching distance for both these models? I still not sure if the better for 3,5m- 4m distance rather smaller tv with "sharper " pictures in SD resolution or if rather bigger one. BTW here is czech review http://www.digizone.cz/clanky/lg-50p...-hodne-muziky/
 
Last edited:

Steve Withers

Reviewer
With plasmas the brighter the image the more energy it uses, so for our measurements we play some standard material and then see how much energy the display is using. Obviously the amount of energy will fluctuate depending on how bright or dark the image is but on average the 42" version uses around 160W in its calibrated mode. Obviously in 3D mode the energy use increases to 200W because the image is brighter. With the 50" version the larger screen requires more energy and as such we averaged around 220W in calibrated mode and 250W in 3D mode. I didn't test it in the energy saving mode because I feel that is detrimental to the image. The PW450 isn't as efficient as other plasmas I have seen but the energy consumption is nothing like that of an amplifier so it's all relative. As for viewing distance I would say that 3.5 to 4 metres is fine for either size but I think you would benefit from the larger screen when it comes to 3D.
 

deblee

Novice Member
In your review for the 50" model you mention
As with the 42" version of the PW450, the 50' model was also capable of producing a surprisingly bright image for a plasma but the dynamic range was again hampered by some equally poor blacks. Whilst blacks have never been LG's strong point, the absence of a TruBlack filter on the PW450 resulted in some genuinely poor black levels. We measured a 0IRE screen at 0.11cd/m2 which is the same as the measurement we took on the 42" model and frankly worse than a lot of LCD screens.
Are you recording black level readings as part of your reviews now?
 

Steve Withers

Reviewer
It varies from reviewer to reviewer and review to review but since so many people seem interested in the black level measurements I try and include them on my TV reviews.
 

ruimarq

Standard Member
I have just bought this TV and I was hoping someone would be able to post the best/ideal calibration settings for the TV? Many thanks.
 

CostasC

Standard Member
Hi Steve,

In your review of this Tv you said:

As we mentioned in the previous section the 2D performance is reasonably good but in reality there are better displays at this price point that offer both 1080p and greater features.
I've checked the review lists on this site, and found nothing at this price point that matches your description above. Would you care to let us in on those models that you consider offer better value/performance?

Thanks,
Costas
 

Similar threads

Trending threads

Latest News

Panasonic TVs get BritBox streaming app
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Clearaudio Concept turntable re-launched as Active edition
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Teufel announces Cinebar Ultima and Cinedeck TV sound solutions
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Sky adds 300 hours of Channel 5 box-sets
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung Smart TVs from 2012-2015 require update for BBC iPlayer
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom