What does payong lots for a tv really give me?


Active Member
Hi all,
Not knowing much about they whats, why's, wherefores of tv's but knowing there are different types ie LCD, plasma, led, oled, some with more Hz than others, some with a plethora of connection types (hdmi/USB/av/other) and seemingly much much more. My question I guess is really quite basic but I bet the answer isn't:

Why spend big bucks on a tv when one for less will do the job just as good ?

Thoughts anyone?


Distinguished Member
What do you call lots?

What do you want to spend? How big do you want? What do you use the TV for? How far will you sit from it? How bright is the room?


Active Member
I gather your making a good valid point here ( reading between your lines ).
Basically perhaps willing to stretch when ready to ~£700 but would want to do homework before took plunge.
Size ~37/40
Distance away - between 3-8feet (in old money ;) ) depending on where people sit.

What I was meaning is tv's can range from ~£400 into the £1000 + and more. Yes given the norms - size, new tech, make, perhaps even projectors and screens. Why should I pay a lot more money for say 1 of 2 or more tv's where I really can't tell the difference ?


Distinguished Member
You are asking in the 'Which TV should I buy' forum, rather than the general TV forum, so I assumed you are looking to buy one

Loads of reasons...e.g.

Finish - colour, material
What the screen is made of
Extra networking stuff - DLNA, wireless, SMART access to iplayer etc
Extra tuners - HD Freeview / HD Freesat

Then the more intangible, marketing spend, R&D spend, likely supply and demand, brand

If you can't tell the difference, just buy the cheapest one that you find acceptable (but buy with an extended warranty as cheap in TVs often means lower quality, although not always) :)

In reality, at this time of year, for TVs of similar spec/size (regardless of the tech), assuming there is comparable demand and the retailer/manufacturer isn't trying to get rid of stockpiles of an unpopular model, the price is very much of a muchness - Sony and Panasonic tend to be more expensive, Samsung, Toshiba and LG tend to be cheaper. Phillips tend to be hard to find in the Uk and are expensive as they have fancy styling, Ambilight etc

37-40" at 3ft - Standard def will look pixellated most likely, too close to any TV IMO of any size, but each to their own


Active Member
Don't really have much to add to vickster's excellent post. I will try to cover some other points.

if the viewing distance is 3' for some, and 8 for others, you will not be happy with any screen size. 3' is awfully close for 40", but at 8" you could get away with 42 easily.

I would say generally speaking, stay away from bottom of the range and top of the range tvs. You are more likely to get value for money with the mid-range models. Depending on what you are after, 700 should be plenty for a 40". Once you have decided what features you want, I would say it's best to compare a £400 tv to a £1000 tv (where I would probably say that 1000 is too much for a 40" tv, at that point you are past the value for money sweet spot). If you can't then great, get the cheap one.


Active Member
Right a little more info:
Looked again at distance between tv and chairs - lets say ~3m aka ~9'8" ( my 3' was my kids ;) )
Type of use - PS3 / Blu Ray films / streaming films/video from NAS and SKY HD box (albeit we only currently have the free HD channels).

Also audio is important as have an old Bose 123 I pass my audio to using my tv as sort of a central pre-amp.

So tv requirements good spec able to play SD and HD. Good contrast, decent amount of hdmi inputs, LAN port (or 2). I've probably missed some spec but above is a good start.

I also scan, when I get the chance normal websites plus some special offer sites and may make a decision one day ;/

The info the above replies have given me plenty more to consider.


Distinguished Member
Panasonic 42ST30 plasma, gives you the 3D option for the future. £550 at JL, but can be found for under £500 if not fussed about warranty

Unless the room is very sunny and curtainless....

Panasonic ST30 (TX-P46ST30B) 46 Inch 3D Plasma TV Review | AVForums.com - UK Online

Not sure about the LAN port, doesn't have DLNA, may need to go up to the 42GT30 which should still be in budget (also a review on here)

Look at the Panasonic UK site for full specs

These are 2011 models, the replacements will start to appear around may but prices will be high

Night :)


Distinguished Member
Just so you know LED sets are LCDs just with LEDs for the back light.

The ST30 is a bargain at the mo, was 900-1000 when it came out.
In most areas plasma are better IMO, they cant go as bright as LCDs, can get IR and some people see them flicker and notice trails with motion. These people are the minority but you need to check you arent one of them.

Plasma has better more detailed black levels(darker part of the picture), better motion, lower lag, no viewing angle restrictions or light uniformity issues and you tend to get better PQ for the money.

At over 8ft you could go up to 50" depending on use, I have a 46" at about 8ft away and its bang on for my room( about 3m by 3.5m).


Active Member
In most areas plasma are better IMO, they cant go as bright as LCDs, can get IR and some people see them flicker and notice trails with motion. These people are the minority but you need to check you arent one of them.

What is IR (infra Red)? If the cant go as bright as LCD and get flicker how can they be seen as better ?


Plasma has better more detailed black levels(darker part of the picture), better motion, lower lag, no viewing angle restrictions or light uniformity issues and you tend to get better PQ for the money.


So detailed black does this directly correlate with the contrast values I see listed in tv specs ?
Again I am very much a tv officianado noob.

What about the old plasma dead pixel issue of yesteryear have they resolved this now ?

Am ok with people's opinions here too why do you and others recommend plasma over LCD/LEDs ?

Thinking about OLED tv too or now am I talking about a whole new tech and also a higher price for comparable quality ?


Active Member

IR = 'image retention'

I personally think you really need to start going into shops to see for yourself.

The guys here are making very good arguments for plasma, but I just can't bring myself to like it. I find it far too reflective, and I suspect I am also just accustomed to the different picture the LCD produces. I prefer LCD.


Distinguished Member
LCD is great if you sit head on to the TV, don't have backlight bleed on dark screens and the motion is handled well - my LCD manages to achieve on the last of these. That said, it was £400 less than the cheapest 46" plasma at the time. If buying now, I'd certainly consider the 46ST30.

Go to your local friendly independent AV dealer and have a look at the options. Plasma is only reflective if the room is bright. My LCD screen is more reflective that my old plasma - let's say equivalent as the LCD is much bigger


Active Member
I agree wholeheartedly. Lots to think about and for sure nereid to hit the shops and check out what's there and see for myself.

I do have to admit liking LCD however need to compare what's out there today and make a more informed decision.
Cheers all


Distinguished Member
IR is image retention, most you will never see, some can get more persistant IR. IR is like a ghost after image where the phosphors have got a bit over excited, happens with static images if on the screen for a while. I dont see it as an issue and Im a gamer, its just one of the pros and cons of plasma.

Detail in the darker parts of an image(shadow detail) is better on plasma due to the way the tech works, plasma is a per pixel based technology where as LCD uses liquid crystals to direct its back light, so the screen isnt lit per pixel. A person more technical will be able to explain it.

Phosphor trails and flicker are noticed by a minority of people, I mention it to people so they dont go buying a set without looking,first, for those that see it this is a nono for them. Plasma is the better tech IMO and many others more qualified than me due to better motion handling, black levels, viewing angles, screen uniformity, contrast, detail thats available, lower lag for gaming, more natural picture, its close to CRT technology that is widly seen as the best for SD material, higher motion resolution and is cheaper to buy for comparable/better PQ.

I repeat though, plasma isnt perfect, no TV tech is, its all about needs, environment, budget and your eyes. Pros and cons of both tech, I push plasma as I believe it better and there is more rot out there about plasma than LCD. Plasma being older tech is one thing that gets thrown around, simply not true, as a product its actually a bit younger, as an invention I think its a year or two older. Many sales people wrongly push LCD and willingly miss inform with LED back lit sets. End of the day I just want people to get the best for their money.:)
Last edited:

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: New TVs, Samsung Q800T Soundbar review, IFA latest, Movie and AV News, B+W Brad Pitt
Top Bottom