1. Join Now

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

Should I wait for LCD?

Discussion in 'LCD & LED LCD TVs' started by tmurphy, Jun 25, 2003.

  1. tmurphy

    tmurphy
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    560
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Location:
    Preston
    Ratings:
    +60
    Having gone the rounds of persuding the wife tolet me have a 50" plasma screen, I was all set to go off and get one this weekend from Sound & Vision in Bolton.

    However....

    After dropping the usual "I'm getting a plasma screen and your not" :) wise cracks at work, one of the replies got me thinking.

    "Why not wait for LCD screens?" I know they are not as large as the plasma's yet, but they must be planning 50" LCD soon.
    Is the technology up to it? Should I wait?, if so how long? Or will the (probably) large price tag scare me to death.


    Thanks

    Tony
     
  2. mikeq

    mikeq
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Go for the plasma, you will not regret it.

    Mike
     
  3. nathan_silly

    nathan_silly
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Great reply mike. :rolleyes:

    I can see why people could prefer LCD TV's over Plasma- better resolution, longer lifespan, less power consumption, proven technology (been out longer than Plasma)

    Although LCD's still have problems like poor black level, backlight failure.

    Still price per inch for LCD is very expensive, it'll be a while until 42" and bigger screens are released at a affordable price.

    Oh regarding your work collegues- tell them to get lost. You don't have to compete with them.
     
  4. LV426

    LV426
    Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    12,823
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere in South Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +5,032
    I guess it's a matter of preference vs. patience. I prefer (by quite a long way) the look of an LCD image over Plasma. Discounting differences in the resolutions (and, many large plasmas have quite low resolution, whereas some even very small LCDs have much higer resolutions) and assuming things like the onboard scaler, tuner etc., are equal, IMO, a well-made LCD will produce a more watchable, easier on the eye, image.

    So, in your place, I would wait for LCD prices to come down further, and sizes to increase.

    But that's just my view. If I didn't have the other equipment that I do, and wanted (urgently!) a large screen, I might think differently - which is what I mean by patience vs. preference.

    I think there is little doubt that LCDs will get bigger, cheaper, and better. And, I guess plasmas will also get cheaper and better. But, for me, the constant, totally flicker-free image of LCD is very attractive.
     
  5. nathan_silly

    nathan_silly
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    My laptop screen has fairly average picture quality, blacks aren't black, overall a CRT beats it for colour (but not of course geometry/convergence and the other problems with CRT devices)

    So how does a new high quality LCD screen compare? My laptop looses brightness off-angle (alot worse than a CRT RPTV)

    If a 42" LCD screen has something like 3072x2304 resolution I would seriously consider a LCD screen over a Plasma.
     
  6. LV426

    LV426
    Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    12,823
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere in South Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +5,032
    I'd say that the typical screen fitted to a laptop, or, indeed, sold as a separate PC monitor is not really representative of the best of breed LCD TVs. That's not to say the TVs can't still be improved upon - they surely can. But in terms of colour rendition and viewing angle, as I've mentioned before, the Samsung undoubtedly comes close to a direct view CRT. Its black level performance is not as good, but the 'granularity' of the image is much finer than the shadow mask on an equivalently-sized CRT TV. Swings and roundabouts. (IMO there are more swings than roundabouts - or is it the other way round?)
     
  7. wilber

    wilber
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2002
    Messages:
    1,970
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Ratings:
    +30
    If you're near a John Lewis go and have a look at the Sharp 30 inch lcd - If you can get it showing sky sports then so much the better. Bare in mind this is a set that magazines are raving about. It's awful, pixelation, motion blur, poor viewing angle, it's got the lot - yeuch and £3600 ...

    LCD technology has a long way to go (mind you the Sony 30 inch model is a work of art to look at).

    Will it overtake plasma? I don't think so - my techno-freak 18 year old was explaining to me about the latest Jap video technology that's gonna blow it all away in just a few years anyway (the point is don't wait on the off chance that something better will come along, because it will, we just don't know when).

    Plasma gets my vote (for now)
     
  8. Joe Fernand

    Joe Fernand
    Distinguished Member AVForums Sponsor

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2002
    Messages:
    24,284
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    The Borders
    Ratings:
    +2,573
    Hello all

    Have to concur with Wilber.

    Just back from the CEDIA UK show in Brighton and as ever nothing (or just about nothing) Plasma, DLP, LCD projection and LCD TV's were very well set-up but the LCD TV's in particular looked woeful.

    Having owned and used plasma since 1998 and not lost one to the feared burn-in I cant see what the hype surrounding current LCD TV technology is all about - unless you can go in and do some serious setting up (which I doubt) I think it will be a few more generations before LCD is a viable 'first' choice TV; most of the magazines look at them as lifestyle 'in your kitchen' background wall paper devices.

    Best regards

    Joe
     
  9. mikeq

    mikeq
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I was trying to keep it short and sweet:D

    There are many pros and cons to each TV technology out there, I have yet to be dissapointed by my Panny 42" 4 series plasma.

    Its not a High Definition set, I sit about 7 ft away from it and the resolution doesn't affect my viewing pleasure what so ever, if I intended to put a PC through it then I may have chosen differently.

    5 months down the line and I still smile :cool: when I switch it on each night, and playing the XBox through it is a joy to behold (if I bought the HD model would that have made the enemy easier to spot:devil: )

    I'm not a true videophile (is that the correct term) so I don't analyse everything to the nth degree and don't have my enjoyment spoilt by the slightest little thing, or more to the point I don't see many of the little things others talk about.

    So if you are like me get the plasma, you will not be dissapointed or you will never buy anything as you will always be waiting for the next best thing.

    Mike
     
  10. alexs2

    alexs2
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2002
    Messages:
    13,896
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,674
    If it was a straight choice between a plasma and an LCD screen,I'd certainly take the plasma currently(and I say that as an RPTV owner!)as the the current generation of large screen LCDs still suffer from poor viewing angles(worse than my RPTV),excessive price,and worst of all,smearing of movement.
     
  11. gmt steve

    gmt steve
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    648
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Manchester
    Ratings:
    +6
  12. jhjerpe

    jhjerpe
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    696
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    North London
    Ratings:
    +63
    I went for Plasma, as for all the years of uing LCDs on Laptops and high definition screens (like my Apple studio display) they haven't really sorted many of the problems with TFT LCDs.

    The colour balance is often wrong, back lights make everything look 'bright' - nice in some ways but still not what the producer of the image intended. Motion blur is also a problem. Viewing angle is a nightmare and get any natrual light on it and your stuffed. A lot of these problems have been solved on LCD TV, but not to my satisfaction.

    I do a lot of video editing on LCD panels, but still have to have a CRT / Plasma hooked up to do colour balance and birghtness adjustments.

    Personally I like CRT rear projection, but they are big a bulky which is why I replaced mine for a Panny 42" Plasma. I also hate the convergence and focus issues of big CRT displays.
     
  13. paiger

    paiger
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Asking about LCD vs Plasma on these forums is like asking if Sony amps are any good. You'll mainly get the same answer.

    My advice is to go and see for yourself what you think. For me, screenburn is too much of a worry to buy a plasma. To others is isn't.

    People's natural bias is towards what they have bought and there are many more plasmas at the mo I would guess.

    I don't think that LCD is sorted for really big screens yet but then, I haven't seen one recently.

    I will be buying an LCD screen. Which one, I have not yet decided but I'll make up my own mind.
     
  14. 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've got a plasma and an LCD television, in different rooms. So would say that I have a reasonably unbiased opinion of the two technologies.

    Major difference? Black levels and contrast and therefore ultimately colour reproduction; these are two different technologies. Plasmas work by emitting light – where 100% means shine white and 0% means don’t shine and be black – in a similar way to CRT. LCD works by blocking light – where 100% means block and be black and 0% means don’t block the white light. The problem with LCDs is that it’s impossible to block the black on a per pixel basis and there is light leakage, therefore black is never black and contrast is always imperfect. Furthermore, this blocking leads to residual ghosting when there are areas of fast moving contrast.

    Dead pixels are much nastier on LCD than on plasma, this is because “pixels” are actually made of three pixels (one red, one green, one blue). If a pixel dies on a plasma, because it’s a light emitting technology you could see a discoloured spot (same brightness as it’s neighbours, just the wrong hue). On an LCD, if one of these three pixels dies it means that light it let though at full brightness; you will see a bright red, green or blue dot permanently on the screen.

    jhjerpe said “I do a lot of video editing on LCD panels, but still have to have a CRT / Plasma hooked up to do colour balance and birghtness adjustments.” I’ve yet to see anyone who needs accurate colour reproduction either in print design, or post production, or whatever rely on LCD monitors because the colour reproduction (particularly skin tone) just doesn’t have the range.

    There's horror stories about plasmas -- from needed gas refilling to screen burn to IR interference to dead pixels to all sorts -- but some of these are not true, and others are no longer an issue. It's also a common misconception that plasma is a new technology, when in fact it's actually a mid-60s technology and pre-dates LCD by quite some time. Have I ever encountered any problems with plasma? Or my friends and family with plasmas? Nope. But then again, no problems with LCD either.

    Will manufacturers ever solve black level / contrast / colour reproduction on LCD? I have no idea. Am I happy with my LCD screen? Yes. Do I think it’s as good picture quality as my plasma? No.

    StooMonster
     
  15. paiger

    paiger
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Stoo,

    I hear and understand what you are saying. I don't believe that LCD's can do PQ as good as plasmas, maybe I'm wrong. There was a post on here a while back asking about screenburn and the resulting replies did not fill me with confidence. Basically, if you are carefull, it'll be OK. Now I don't know if thats true or not but it's enough to put me off. Too mch in life to be carefull about without worrying that you'll destroy a 3 grand piece of kit by getting lashed and leaving the test match on all night.

    I guess it depends on your standards. Me, I'm an audio freak and PQ is secondary. We screened Shrek for a class of kids the other day using a cheap Sony data projector, a VCR and a white board. I thought it was brilliant. Technically naff, but the atmosphere was great.

    My brother won't have an LCD monitor for his PC as he says they are £%$%. I won't have a CRT because I think they are crass, big, noisy and hot (plus wet cat likes to sit on it to dry off!)

    To me, a good enough picture is OK. The fact that LCD is long lasting, runs cooler and quieter and uses less power wins every time.

    I'm not suggesting that it can beat a plasma if you are a PQ enthusiast. So, I guess it's each to their own.
     
  16. GASWATKINS

    GASWATKINS
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    245
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +10
    What a great debate guys
    I'm getting all confused by the mags ,reviews etc
    but to hear it all from the horses mouth ie owners of these beasts is great
    Thanks

    my plasma dream will continue to be a plasma dream not lcd
    Hopefully Xmas will see a few good deals
    well summer time is outside with Beers and BBQ and a few mates l
     
  17. mid_gen

    mid_gen
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2003
    Messages:
    215
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +30
    I looked at a lot of different displays before I bought mine. I eventually plumbed for the sharp 30", because I didn't want a monstrous display, 30" is fine. I preferred the picture to any of the plasmas I saw.

    You can hear all the technical arguments you like, but in the end it comes down to what you prefer. There are lots of valid points here, but in the end, it's you who is making the purchase. MY advice, go into as many dealers as possible, they will be happy to demo stuff for you, and make up your own mind.
     
  18. 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
    £3 grand? Cheap! My Panny5 50" plasma screen was £7 grand. ;) I digress, this is the kind of thing I was talking about when said "plasma horror stories". Mrs StooMonster has left DVD player and Sky on static menus for hours and hours, I've played console games for evenings at a time, had Windows running with task bar, has been on children's channels for entire day, have I ever had any burn in? Nope ... except once, paused DVD player stuck mid-Shrek for entire day, but I run the Panny white bar screensaver for 15 minutes and any sign of residual picture was gone.

    Interestingly RAMiAM told me today that his PioMXE 50" retains DOGs when he watches the same channel for a couple of hours in the evening. Perhaps some brands are more robust than others?

    Now, if a plasma was running train time tables all day every day (like London trains stations) then I could understand burn in problem -- worst offenders had to be Millennium Dome where 300 odd plasmas just had static arrow graphic permanently displayed on them.

    My monitor is Sony FW900 24" widescreen CRT. (Your brother sound like a sensible bloke.) :) Two year old StooMonster Junior's PC has 17" LCD. Different product for different requirements.

    If my LCD / plasma / CRT lasts more than 5 years, that's great; 10, 20 or 30 years of continuous usage does not worry me it'll be long gone by then. And if one saves me a few pence per annum on power? Not a factor. Dot pitch doesn't matter as I sit 5m away from plasma screen. Plasma heat is a benefit -- it saves the gas heating bills in the winter. ;)

    I have an LCD and a plasma because there are for different purposes -- like my monitor vs StooMonster Jnr's -- my plasma is for watching movies with HQ sound system (and the odd console or bit of television) and the LCD is for watching television. However some friends have projector for movies, and plasma for television; guess it's what's acceptable to you. :D

    mid_gen is correct. More than saying is plasma or LCD or CRT or RPTV better, I think it's better to identify the purpose of what you require, get some demonstrations of the differing technologies matching your budget; only consider the theoretic pros/cons each technology if you really must. (That's how I ended up with one of each.)

    StooMonster
     
  19. cheeseywang

    cheeseywang
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2003
    Messages:
    218
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    over the blue moon
    Ratings:
    +1
    This has made very interesting reading as I'm considering the 42" Sony Grand Wega LCD rear projection set. At around £2300 it knocks spots off every other RP set of comparable price I've seen demoed. I reckon it also looks better than any similarly priced plasma I've seen. I reckon it's the way to go if this is about your price point.

    Picture quality is so subjective you can really only trust your own eyes and use the forum to help you narrow down the likely candidates. Long may the debates continue.
     
  20. paiger

    paiger
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Stoo, I want an LCD for everyday TV, PJ for movies. So, we're not so far away after all.

    I wouldn't consider a 22" LCD set as a movie screen. It just wouldn't be right.

    As for screen burn, I just don't know who to believe. I guess you paid a good few squid for yours and it's fine. Maybe a 3 grand set would suffer.
     
  21. mikeq

    mikeq
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Remember Stoo went for the 50" hence the price, I went for a 42" Panny and it cost just over £3k. Not had any problems with screen burn.

    I watch a variety of stuff with black bars top and bottom, the occasional 4:3 stuff with bars at the side and play the XBox on it (most ever played was about 4 hours at one time). No screen burn issues.

    I really don't think screen burn is as big an issue as people make out, as long as you are sensible and follow a few simple precautions.

    Mike
     
  22. gingerone

    gingerone
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    2,404
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Ratings:
    +289
    Are Sony amps any good?
     
  23. mikeq

    mikeq
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Probably better asking in a new thread in the Amps section and stating the model you are interested in.
     
  24. paiger

    paiger
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    They're OK.:D
     

Share This Page

Loading...