1. Join Now

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

Plasma v LCD

Discussion in 'Plasma TVs' started by Stephen Wilde, Nov 1, 2004.

  1. Stephen Wilde

    Stephen Wilde
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    1,810
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +93
    It seems that LCD is likely to achieve 1920x1080 in larger size displays before Plasma achieves that resolution in displays around the 50" size.
    LCD quality is improving and prices dropping faster than Plasma.
    LCD will also accept higher resolutions from a high specification PC graphics card.
    Up to now I have favoured the Plasma solution. Should I be changing my allegiance or not?
     
  2. Todda

    Todda
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    In Britain, they havn't yet.

    Because Plasma has been around longer they have had more time to develope. They also currently sell for a lot less than LCD.

    I think your points show that LCD might be the technology to go for in the future, but if you are buying now, in my opinion plasma is definetely the way to go.
     
  3. Ikki

    Ikki
    Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,173
    Products Owned:
    2
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    67
    Location:
    Lancs
    Ratings:
    +97
    I haven't seen an LCD that I liked the picture of yet. They all seem less well defined and more unnatural than a plasma picture.
     
  4. peezee

    peezee
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    It'll be interesting to compare a good 50" plasma at 1366x768 (say a Pana or Pioneer) with one of these new 1920x1080 LCD screens... My feeling is that under equal conditions (same source and connection, same viewing distance from screen, same screen size) the extra definition will not translate into as much improvement in terms of perceived additional details (because of some limitations in our psycho-visual system characteristics), while the common LCD technology drawbacks will still be there and "visible" (though attenuated thanks to HD source material).

    Bottom line, I believe we might be surprised that a plasma display with a "poor" 1366x768 resolution still delivers an overall equal - if not better - picture quality than the latest and greatest 1920x1080 LCD screen... Well, hopefully we should know soon now! :cool:
     
  5. Rob20

    Rob20
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,619
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Ratings:
    +354
    Sharps upcoming 45" lcd tv has a native resolution of 1920 by 1080. Should be out before the end of the year. However, surely you won't be able to fully test the screen until 2006 when Blu-Ray dvd is released and Shy's hi-def service starts.

    http://www.sharp.co.uk/titanium/
     
  6. MAW

    MAW
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    14,082
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Nr Dorking
    Ratings:
    +412
    I'm sure the concensus would be 'not quite yet'. The sharp is awesome, you could get euro1080i to feed it with, or alternatively you could get a life. It will also cost more than a year's bonus for all you City wizz kids, so it will be a while before it takes off.
     
  7. peezee

    peezee
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Rob20, there's a load of HD material already available today in various forms (clips, trailers, DVDs, Euro1080/HD1 Sat network, D-VHS, etc...) so for sure we won't have to wait until 2006 to actually test this new Sharp LCD TV... ;)

    MAW, not sure what you're referring to with "I'm sure the concensus would be 'not quite yet'. "...? :confused:
     
  8. Neil-d

    Neil-d
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Having used both, I can say that LCD is compelling when it comes to sharpness, price, weight, longevity and as you mention resolution. But LCD does need to be projected with a light source, which hurts its ability to render black. Plasma also offers better viewing angle. Advancements in either technology probably won't change these factors much.
     
  9. MAW

    MAW
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    14,082
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Nr Dorking
    Ratings:
    +412
    Price? You must be joking!
     
  10. cwick

    cwick
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    Messages:
    2,207
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    Reading
    Ratings:
    +95
  11. Stephen Wilde

    Stephen Wilde
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    1,810
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +93
    Viewing angle is a good point if using it as a TV but not such a problem for PC use.
    The black level point is interesting because I read that it was better than plasma. Which is correct?
    Looked at 32" plasma and LCD side by side in John Lewis yesterday and saw no real difference. LCD colours just as vibrant.
    Maw, how long do you think "not quite yet" represents? Sharp is going for 50" or more within the year. Plasma may be over 3 years to get a 50" at 1920x1080.
    Price will be high at first but a Sharp 30" LCD was near £10000 only 2 years ago. Anyway many forum members want best performance and future proofing with cost not as big a factor as for the general public.
     
  12. MAW

    MAW
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    14,082
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Nr Dorking
    Ratings:
    +412
    Stephen, it must have been a truly pants plasma! Or else it had a spotlight shining on the glass. But even with my paranoid android tendencies I think LCD is catching up, but from a long way behind only a short time ago. How long? Give it 2 years and price will be the same, black levels, we'll get used to grey...
     
  13. Todda

    Todda
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Who's daft enough to pay £3000 for a PC monitor. Most people that buy these things expect to be able to use it as a TV.
     
  14. Stephen Wilde

    Stephen Wilde
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    1,810
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +93
    A PC user can also use it as a TV for single person viewing. £3000 for a large size dual use item seems good to me.
    I have been using 2 good quality plasmas for nearly 3 years and have seen many on display. Neither the Plasma nor the LCD were "pants".
    I have started this thread out of concern for my future investment in these technologies.
    Will just have to await a direct comparison between 50" Plasma at 1366x768 and 50" LCD at 1920x1080.
    Should be possible in less than a year.
    The 45" Sharp is a start. Perhaps someone can report in due course.
     
  15. ianh64

    ianh64
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,233
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    SW London/Surrey borders
    Ratings:
    +63
    That report was published 27th October 2004, but I think it must have been written 18 months ago and not updated since. :boring:
     
  16. Neil-d

    Neil-d
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    That was my initial reaction as well - this must be 1-2 years old! Despite the hyperbole, some good points are made. These new technology sets are 5-10 times the price of old fashioned CRT, and even at that price there are certain performance drawbacks and issues let's say.

    I don't think the ghosting is such an issue as they describe, but all the plasma's & LCD's do seem to have some room to improve on color bit depth and black level reproduction. For someone in the 30" inch and under market that wants a low price and analog signal, CRT is the value choice. But I think that article ignores the aspects of larger sizes, lower weight categories and sharp digital reproduction.
     
  17. Neil-d

    Neil-d
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I guess where I was coming from is that LCD projection TV's go for about $60/inch here. With LCD computer monitors there's a range, but it's between $30-$60 per inch.

    Plasma TVs, for comparison, have just recently dropped from about $150/inch to the $100/inch range.
     
  18. Neil-d

    Neil-d
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    In fairness, I checked out one of my best LCD monitors. It surprised me that it had a not too shabby viewing angle - at least 100 degrees.

    Good plasma's though are giving 160+ degrees viewing angle.

    Projection sets, even the new ones, can't deliver 160-170 degree viewing angle. Even if you can get a wider angle, anything off the center is a noticeably weaker image.

    And when it comes to performance in a room with ambient light - there's no question - plasma all the way.

    I'm not sure your testing conditions, but the newer generations of plasma's should also have much much (50 more much's) better black level performance.

    One way to think about it is to consider how the technology produces its image. The LCD projection (and DLP, and LCOS, and D-ILA) use a powerful bright lamp to project the image. With that big beam going, you are going to have to have a strong opaque shadow to block out the light and get a truer black. You'll find on these projection type sets that trying to see a dark figure in a dark scene will be impossible. Look for shadows in a dark suit. Look to see if the black is really 'black' or just a charcoal shade. If you are watching a scene with a lot of color it may not be obvious how poor the black performance is.

    Plasma's are much better (except the older ones) but even they have some limitations.

    The way to check this is to view the set in a perfectly dark room. You'll notice that black is not really black, but more a glowing shade of grey. How dark that grey is determines the black level performance.

    Afficiando's (and JVC I think) are recognizing this and put soft lighting in the room or behind the set. This tricks the eye and when comparing against the glow of the back light, the black level appears better.
     
  19. MAW

    MAW
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    14,082
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Nr Dorking
    Ratings:
    +412
    From where I'm sitting, price per inch is in LCD#s favour only in the sizes that plasma doesn't do, ie small. A 37" LCD is more that a plasma, a 40" is nearly twice a 42" plasma
     
  20. Todda

    Todda
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    It doesn't quite work like that here. The bigger the plasma , the more they cost per inch.

    If you look at the cost per inch a 4:3 LCD might be cheaper than the average 42". If you compare like for like (which is really the only way to compare the price) the average 42" LCD is a lot more expensive than the average plasma.
     
  21. MAW

    MAW
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    14,082
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Nr Dorking
    Ratings:
    +412
    What! You mean Philips trendy ambilight is:-
    1 Got a purpose, and
    2 There to con us that philips LCD and plasma actually have a black level, not just mud!
     
  22. Ikki

    Ikki
    Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,173
    Products Owned:
    2
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    67
    Location:
    Lancs
    Ratings:
    +97
    For me, my plasma has an excellent viewing angle and a good picture (great on dvd). The only negative is the poor black level (compared to crt), which I am happy to live with in view of the plus points, especially the fact that I am not prepared to take up a large part of the room with a crt tv the size of a pygmy hippopotamus. I have not seen an LCD tv that compares with it for picture (yes I have seen the latest models such as the Philips 'with ambilight'). If I was buying now, my choice would still be plasma.

    LCD is catching up, prices are dropping for both plasma and lcd, but I wonder what state the market and technology will be in in five to eight years when I go for a new tv. It may not be crt, lcd or plasma, but I will watch my plasma till then happy that it gives me great viewing. :)
     

Share This Page

Loading...