Topic: New TV LCD or Plasma ?

[David]

Decided to get a new TV 40" and I do like the Samsung.I have looked in Comets and other outlets but cant make up my mind whether to go for a plasma or LCD,is the quality better on LCD ?and will be HD so will I see any noticeable difference ?
I know there are a few here who will have experience of one if not both and looking for feedback on this topic  Thank you 

[Sandra]

Plasma is generally considered to be superior to LCD for the better blacks and higher contrast ratios. They can have problems still with screen burn which LCDs dont suffer from, more important if people are playing games on them with some static parts of the screen on for a long time and for the newer digital channels with the silly channel ID logos, if you dont change the channel for a few hours.

Unless you only ever watch from a HD source though I wouldnt get either yet, unless your TV has blown up and you need to replace it. I have been looking for a Plasma or LCD that will display a good enough picture when on SD for over 12 months now and havent found one that matches my Samsung HD CRT on SD material.
Its really annoying as I have recently bought a HD satellite receiver and I know that on my 32 inch TV the HD is stunning and the SD isnt far behind but if I go up to a 42 inch then the HD will still be good but the SD will be like it is in everyones house I have been into who has them.
A friend recently bought a Samsung 42 inch Plasma that has excellent reviews and looks really nice when switched off but I honestly wouldnt have it in my house unless everything I watched was in HD. I even set it up for her and got it to the best picture I could and she could see what I meant when I said there was a lack of the sharpness that she had on her old CRT TV, which I still had connected up at the side of the new one showing the same channel, there were even slight trails of the ball when watching tennis which she saw when I pointed them out to her but has got used to it now and told me this evening that she watched a recent tennis match and couldnt see it, I doubt that its really gone but I havent seen any tennis on it since she said that problem has gone.

Be very careful looking at the TVs in the stores, if they are showing a cartoon then that will look good as there is no "depth" to it so it will be nice and sharp. If its connected to a Blu ray DVD player it will also of course be brilliant. Ask the sales guy/lady to show you the same TV running off something through a SCART socket like a Freeview box or non HD sky box or even take a VCR along with you and play that through it, (DVDs will be better and may even be upscaled so theyre not a good test). If the sales people think their TV is good enough they shouldnt object but I wouldnt be surprised if they did 

OLED TVs are only a couple of years away so I would hang on if you can until they come out at the right sizes and prices. SED TVs are a few more years away yet but they will be excellent for all sources, but by then HD will probably be the norm for most broadcasts and we will probably be watching more streamed online HD TV so even todays poorly perfoming on SD, Plasmas and LCDs will look ok by then 

[Sandra]

In addition to my earlier post I have just been on AV forums and found this item which I found interesting :

http://www.avforums.com/forums/high-definition-tv-hardware/855391-motion-blur-sport-panasonic-th42pz85b.html

The bit that I found of particular interst was in post no 4

Frame Interpolation at a consumer price point is still pretty poor - even broadcast standards converters are only really just beginning to have it (to convert 1080/24p to full-motion 1080/60i for example - which is something the new ForA converter does) and they cost a LOT more than a domestic TV... The consumer implementations simply don't have the processing power to keep up - and thus any complex (or even just fast) motion confuses them and images can begin to fall apart, giving very odd motion artefacts.

When I connected my new satellite receiver to my TV and started to set it up it asked if I could see a picture when I pressed next to see if my TV could display 1080/50 or 1080/60 and if not it would set it at what it could do in 10 seconds. As soon as I pressed the buton it said "Good news your TV can display at 1080/50" so I assume that must be even better than 1080/60.
I must admit I dont fully understand these figures but I should think thats why my HD CRT TV gives such good pictures compared to Plasma and LCDs 

[David]

Thanks Sandra..there is a lot to this and I intend to take my time.good tip re cartoons showing instore......more time on this one I think

[Simon]

When I connected my new satellite receiver to my TV and started to set it up it asked if I could see a picture when I pressed next to see if my TV could display 1080/50 or 1080/60 and if not it would set it at what it could do in 10 seconds. As soon as I pressed the buton it said "Good news your TV can display at 1080/50" so I assume that must be even better than 1080/60.
I must admit I dont fully understand these figures but I should think thats why my HD CRT TV gives such good pictures compared to Plasma and LCDs 

My Panasonic plasma displays at 1080/24, when playing blu ray discs, and one or other of the two you mentioned when playing SD, Sandra.  Have to admit, I'd always thought it was something to do with PAL / NTSC, but I could be wrong.

David, when I bought my Plasma a couple of years ago, the picture quality was far superior to all but the most expensive LCDs, and at the time, was the best HD set on the market, for the price.  I think LCDs are much improved these days, and if I came to replace my plasma, I would certainly not ignore LCDs.  The Sony Bravia range can deliver stunning pictures, when fed from an HD source, but it's all dependant on what sort of picture you prefer.  LCDs produce a much brighter, perhaps sharper picture than plasmas, but a good plasma, set up well, will produce a far more natural image.

[David]

Thanks for that Simon.I do have aa LCD 32" at the moment,to be fair its only 3 years old and it wasnt at the top end of the market and its good,however I did retain my 32" philips which set me back £1000 about 6 years ago and the picture and sound indeed out perform the LCD which is only a Goodmans.
As Im redecorating the whole house now,(hence my absence) I was going to get a new TV for the lounge,put the LCD on my bedroom wall and get a new TV.HD recorder and Blu Ray for the lounge.although I watch TV very seldom it is all part of the refurb really and I wanted to get it all out of the way.but if I am unlikely to see any marked improvement then will rethink it all.....

[Simon]

You'll definately see an improvement if you've moving to HD, David, as the Blu Ray player will also upscale playback of your existing DVDs.  Coupled with a new screen, I don't think you'd be disappointed.

[Tony]

David

Here is my two pence worth, you would do well to listen to Sandra  in regard to Audio Video , and totally ignore her input in regard to world politics.

Interesting to note Sandra can recognise the deception employed to misrepresent the [normal life] picture quality of the products in store. Yet fails to recognise the same misrepresentation of reality in political news presentation......funny old world 

[Clive]

Having had both a 42" plasma and LCD I can confirm what Sandra and Simon have said.  I'm kicking myself for buying the LCD.  HD is the biggest con of all.  On a top of the range plasma set (not mine) I've tried to spot the difference whilst flicking between HD and the same programme on the standard channel.  I honestly cannot see any difference at all.  The Emperor has no clothes!

[Sandra]

My Panasonic plasma displays at 1080/24, when playing blu ray discs, and one or other of the two you mentioned when playing SD, Sandra.  Have to admit, I'd always thought it was something to do with PAL / NTSC, but I could be wrong.

You are right about the NTSC/PAL thing I think Simon.
I did some more reading about OLED and laser TVs after I posted and one of the articles contained something that I think partially clears these things up.
P or progressive displays run at 24 frames per second on PAL displays and 30 frames per second on NTSC. i or interlaced displays are doubled to 48 and 60 frames per seconds respectively. So I assume that my TV is 50 fps as its PAL (probably easier than doing 48 for some reason) and not 60 as it would be if it was NTSC.

David, you will definately notice a difference between HD and SD and the difference is more pronounced on bigger screen sizes. The problem is only really on the SD side of things as both LCD and Plasma will show HD content brilliantly, even on cheaper panels, I would think black levels and contrast ratios would be the only real difference between cheaper and dearer sets.
However you can not get as good a picture from an SD source, upscaling it may help but that can introduce problems with the picture apparently, as you can from a CRT. You have seen that already with your own CRT and LCD pictures.

I always think that its funny that people used to spend a fortune on audio equipment because they could listen to it and some people could detect that one system was better than the other yet those same people will now go and buy a Plasma or LCD because it looks nice when its off and showing HD but dont seem to care what it looks like when showing SD content 

@Clive, there is a vast difference in HD, mine looks almost 3D on some type of programmes. I think you must have it set wrong . Try swapping the settings from 720p to 1080i or vice versa.
720p is supposedly better for fast action and sports, 1080i for general and movies. If you have a 1080p panel and source then thats the best for everything 

[Clive]

It's not my system Sandra.  It was just demonstrated to me by the owner. 

[Sandra]

I know you said that but I thought you had HD yourself ?

[Camstop]

Depends on your budget David.

Cheaper end... Sony 40" LCD

High end... Erm one of these

There's loads of deals come on TV's but your best to get a budget then get the best deal for your money.

[Clive]

I know you said that but I thought you had HD yourself ?

No, not I.  I'm a firm believer that sooner or later they will transmit all TV programmes in HD without additional subscription.  I'm not paying Sky a penny more than they charge for the basic package!   

[Sandra]

If your TV is HD Clive then you could buy one of the new freesat HD boxes, Humax are bringing a nice one out with twin tuners and a hard drive or are doing so soon if its not already out. There isnt a lot of HD stuff on it yet but it shouldnt be long before they bring more HD channels out. Freeview is going to have a few HD channels on it when the analogue is switched off next november here in the granada region, not sure when it will be rolled out nationwide.