LCD, LED Plasma - which is best

Forums › Home Theatre (including HTPC and EPG Collector) › LCD, LED Plasma - which is best

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

1730 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#337677 3-Jun-2010 09:43

Jaxson:
cgrew: I'm just not confident 3D TVs will take off in today's market
Technology is only going in one direction. 3D will drop in price and then everyone will get that one when they purchase a new TV. There is very little content now, but it is coming, just check out what 3D films are out now or in production.

Re Plasma disappearing. Plasma has a lot of unpopular attributes, like weight and power consumption. However it has hung in there, primarily with those who value picture quality (ie how it performs) over how it looks cosmetically (ie how thin it is etc). Panasonic has released this technology in 3D so I don't see it being dropped right away, though who knows future wise as other technologies improve.

+1 - Plasma was meant to be dead by now according to industry people. A year ago they were pushing LCD very heavily and were claiming that Plasma was now rapidly on the way out... Hasn't happened.

BTW - everyone talks about Plasma's using more power than LCD's, but what I want to know is how much power do they used compared to a CRT?

MyHeritage

Shop MyHeritage and uncover your origins and find new relatives with a simple DNA test. (affiliate link).

oxnsox

1923 posts

Uber Geek

#337772 3-Jun-2010 13:04

Is that a serious question????

Why I say that is, first find a 42" CRT(with a 16:9 flat screen) then someone can do the math.... you have to have a relative comparison.

Some years back I was told by a manufacturers rep that at that time they didn't expect Plasma screens to be economical to produce below 37", and neither did they think LCD technologies to be economically viably much beyond 32". OK time has moved on.... but the high use of LCD technologies in most every day appliances and interfaces has driven their price down, whereas the more limited market for larger screen devices (and applications of them) sees that segment dominated by expanding screen sizes in Plasma based technology. Just thought you might like to know that.

And 3D is a whole 'nother ball game, when users don't have to wear $150 specs to be viewers AND broadcasters actually transmit enough 3G content, then there will be a market. Bit like HDTV really.... How long have retailers and broadcasters been pushing that barrow???? How much HD content is actually available to viewers???? Oh and by HD I mean 1080p, because thats what you really want from Sky and Freeview sat feeds, if that is your only media stream source.

minimoke

749 posts

Ultimate Geek

#337783 3-Jun-2010 13:18

BTW - everyone talks about Plasma's using more power than LCD's, but what I want to know is how much power do they used compared to a CRT?

I'm one of these thickos that just doesn't undersatnad why such a question is asked. If you can afford to buy a new telly surely you can afford to pay for the power. If you are a Greenie and don't want the polar bears to die - then don't buy a flat screen: end of story.

There should be only be one criteria for buying a tv and that is "viewing pleasure". That is made up of "is the picture sharp"; "are the colours realsitic"; "Does motion flow smoothly" "can I actually see what the salesman is trying to tell I'll see" and "will I feel engaged in what ever it is I'm watching"

Whats the point in buying a lower power tv if its got crap colour and blurry motion!.

But to answer your question - inch for Inch LCD's use about the same as CRT's. The greenies (who don't like conspicuous consumption argue, correctly that flat screens use more power than CRTs. Well that strue - but only becasue the flat screen is bigger than the CRT.

Put both LCD and plasma are becoming more efficient - though its going to get harder to compare apples with apples becasue of the differenc size features they come with. Say for example how do you compare a 40 inch LCD with a 40 inch plasma that also has freeview? Or should we consider those that watch TV News to be greedy energy hogs because they are sucking off the national grid at peak load times wheras the nighttime viewer is the true believer as they are only using power that would otherwise be spill water at the local dam.

Incidentally the bigger the screen the more effiecent (per square inch) they become - so go for the 50 inch plasma!.

cgrew

860 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#337793 3-Jun-2010 13:33

oxnsox: Is that a serious question????

Why I say that is, first find a 42" CRT(with a 16:9 flat screen) then someone can do the math.... you have to have a relative comparison.

Some years back I was told by a manufacturers rep that at that time they didn't expect Plasma screens to be economical to produce below 37", and neither did they think LCD technologies to be economically viably much beyond 32". OK time has moved on.... but the high use of LCD technologies in most every day appliances and interfaces has driven their price down, whereas the more limited market for larger screen devices (and applications of them) sees that segment dominated by expanding screen sizes in Plasma based technology. Just thought you might like to know that.

And 3D is a whole 'nother ball game, when users don't have to wear $150 specs to be viewers AND broadcasters actually transmit enough 3G content, then there will be a market. Bit like HDTV really.... How long have retailers and broadcasters been pushing that barrow???? How much HD content is actually available to viewers???? Oh and by HD I mean 1080p, because thats what you really want from Sky and Freeview sat feeds, if that is your only media stream source.

Couldn't agree more.

cgrew

860 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#337800 3-Jun-2010 13:41

minimoke:

BTW - everyone talks about Plasma's using more power than LCD's, but what I want to know is how much power do they used compared to a CRT?

I'm one of these thickos that just doesn't undersatnad why such a question is asked. If you can afford to buy a new telly surely you can afford to pay for the power. If you are a Greenie and don't want the polar bears to die - then don't buy a flat screen: end of story.

There should be only be one criteria for buying a tv and that is "viewing pleasure". That is made up of "is the picture sharp"; "are the colours realsitic"; "Does motion flow smoothly" "can I actually see what the salesman is trying to tell I'll see" and "will I feel engaged in what ever it is I'm watching"

Whats the point in buying a lower power tv if its got crap colour and blurry motion!.

But to answer your question - inch for Inch LCD's use about the same as CRT's. The greenies (who don't like conspicuous consumption argue, correctly that flat screens use more power than CRTs. Well that strue - but only becasue the flat screen is bigger than the CRT.

Put both LCD and plasma are becoming more efficient - though its going to get harder to compare apples with apples becasue of the differenc size features they come with. Say for example how do you compare a 40 inch LCD with a 40 inch plasma that also has freeview? Or should we consider those that watch TV News to be greedy energy hogs because they are sucking off the national grid at peak load times wheras the nighttime viewer is the true believer as they are only using power that would otherwise be spill water at the local dam.

Incidentally the bigger the screen the more effiecent (per square inch) they become - so go for the 50 inch plasma!.

Haha on the topic of power consumption - if people think LCD & Plama TVs are bad, what about those old 50"+ rear projection TVs that went out of fasion faster then a 70% off everything sale down at Briscoes lol I can tell ya right now - they chewed up power.

All the people that bought those rear projection TVs probably made alot of penguins and polar bears main coarse meals for some very hungry orca whales.

minimoke

749 posts

Ultimate Geek

#337815 3-Jun-2010 13:55

Haha on the topic of power consumption - if people think LCD & Plama TVs are bad, what about those old 50"+ rear projection TVs that went out of fasion faster then a 70% off everything sale down at Briscoes lol I can tell ya right now - they chewed up power.

All the people that bought those rear projection TVs probably made alot of penguins and polar bears main coarse meals for some very hungry orca whales.

As I recall rear projectors were actually the most efficient (inch for inch) of all TV's. I think it was the shock of going from a 22 inch CRT to a 50 Rear that caused the angst in power consumption.

Nety

2584 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#337819 3-Jun-2010 14:05

minimoke:

Haha on the topic of power consumption - if people think LCD & Plama TVs are bad, what about those old 50"+ rear projection TVs that went out of fasion faster then a 70% off everything sale down at Briscoes lol I can tell ya right now - they chewed up power.

All the people that bought those rear projection TVs probably made alot of penguins and polar bears main coarse meals for some very hungry orca whales.

As I recall rear projectors were actually the most efficient (inch for inch) of all TV's. I think it was the shock of going from a 22 inch CRT to a 50 Rear that caused the angst in power consumption.

We used to have a 42" Sony rear pro and its stated power use was 195W. We now have a 46" Full HD Sony and the power use is stated at 197W.
So much the same really.

Media centre PC - Case Silverstone LC16M with 2 X 80mm AcoustiFan DustPROOF, MOBO Gigabyte MA785GT-UD3H, CPU AMD X2 240 under volted, RAM 4 Gig DDR3 1033, HDD 120Gig System/512Gig data, Tuners 2 X Hauppauge HVR-3000, 1 X HVR-2200, Video Palit GT 220, Sound Realtek 886A HD (onboard), Optical LiteOn DH-401S Blue-ray using TotalMedia Theatre Power Corsair VX Series, 450W ATX PSU OS Windows 7 x64

cgrew

860 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#337828 3-Jun-2010 14:18

Nety:
minimoke:

Haha on the topic of power consumption - if people think LCD & Plama TVs are bad, what about those old 50"+ rear projection TVs that went out of fasion faster then a 70% off everything sale down at Briscoes lol I can tell ya right now - they chewed up power.

All the people that bought those rear projection TVs probably made alot of penguins and polar bears main coarse meals for some very hungry orca whales.

As I recall rear projectors were actually the most efficient (inch for inch) of all TV's. I think it was the shock of going from a 22 inch CRT to a 50 Rear that caused the angst in power consumption.

We used to have a 42" Sony rear pro and its stated power use was 195W. We now have a 46" Full HD Sony and the power use is stated at 197W.
So much the same really.

Check this chart out - all 3 types of TVs are a nightmare for power consumption, LCD, Plasma & RPTV

cgrew

860 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#337834 3-Jun-2010 14:24

http://www.greentodaymagazine.com/how-green-is-my-tv.html

Kiwi1971

693 posts

Ultimate Geek

#337840 3-Jun-2010 14:31

oxnsox: For movies I go to..... the movies.

I seriously have to call BS on that comment mate

You bought a 42" plasma with the sole purpose of watching broadcast TV?
[sarcasm] And despite saying you watch films. you ONLY watch them at the cinema? By your reckoning, you don't watch any film over 2 months old unless they are screened as some sort of retro cinema.
It must be annoying if you miss a film you want to watch at the cinema, knowing that you will never...ever... see it,

[/sarcasm]

DLS

lissie

495 posts

Ultimate Geek

#337843 3-Jun-2010 14:38

oxnsox: Sounds like a 32" LCD will be better for packing, and shifting, and watching for you. And if you go for full HD (1080p) then it'll be great for Bluray and DVD's and for unpacking sometime in the future and using.... even in a secondary role.

Sold my 42" Plasma after using it for 6mths and went back to my 32"LCD. It doesn't dominate the room so much but is still great for all my type of viewing. For movies I go to..... the movies. (I had a 37" LCD overseas and it was a good size too, but they are less common here)

What ever you decide my one piece of advice is to pick a unit that has a matt black case. Because if you're ever watching content (from any source) that doesn't fill the screen then it makes the screen boarder less distracting as it blends better with any unused (black) screen space.

Thanks thats useful advice re the case - I hadn't thought of that .

I agree I go to the movies to see movies too LOL Its the sound more than anything that makes the movie going experience and I'm not gonna get that with a couple of little built in speakers

I help authors publish their books - DIYPublishing.co.nz

Jaxson

7678 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#337857 3-Jun-2010 15:00

All good stuff on this topic.

There is heaps of content in HD. It's called Bluray.

And freeview HD's genuine HD plus 5.1 shows, which are the best you're going to get broadcast FTA in the world I suspect. There just isn't the available bandwidth to broadcast 1080P so bringing that up is just silly.

HD is here, it's not a dream. NZ has led the world in a lot of ways by going MPEG4 and now others have followed too. Where we are miles behind the 8 ball is with 3D broadcasts. Auzzie and England have started this. This means buying a 3D capable TV in NZ will see you limited for content for quite a while, until at least some bluray movies start being released with it, and you spend the money on capable players, receiveers and cables as well.

You're not going to get that wow movie feel on a 32" TV. I really think you need a projector for this, but that's just me. I still say buy the biggest TV you can, but if you go above 42" it has to be full HD.

I personally think you want Plasma if you're after a good movie watching TV. LCD's create black by blocking a bright light behind them. Plasmas just don't turn that light on. Neither technology, plasma or LCD, is good in all conditions, but if you want a movie TV, for use in a darkish room, then I back plasma. It weighs more, uses more power, is thicker, but looks the best. Function over form for me.

If you're after a 32" TV then your only option is LCD or LED. If it's to be under $1000 then you're at LCD so that's pretty simple. Pick one and enjoy it, make sure it's got freeview built in and is full HD if you can.

lissie

495 posts

Ultimate Geek

#337860 3-Jun-2010 15:04

If you're after a 32" TV then your only option is LCD or LED. If it's to be under $1000 then you're at LCD so that's pretty simple. Pick one and enjoy it, make sure it's got freeview built in and is full HD if you can.

Sounds like that's what I'll go for - I tend not to sit in a dark room watching TV. With the freeview built is it possible to any hard drive recorder for pause/rewind live TV , record one channel watch another feature?

I help authors publish their books - DIYPublishing.co.nz

minimoke

749 posts

Ultimate Geek

#337874 3-Jun-2010 15:27

Pick one and enjoy it, make sure it's got freeview built in and is full HD if you can.

Not sure about the built in freview advice. How will Lissie record TV shows she misses?. I'm not sure there are too many TV's with HDMI/Component(or even composite)/Optical/Audio "Out" plugs that would connect the TV to a recording device.

Clearly I can't see the point of getting full HD on a 32 incher but then I'm far from convinced the average TV buyer gets the benifit from 1080p - aside from the placebo affect of "I've spent all that money so it must be good". But if Lissie does go full HD - make sure its a well known brand with a decent upscaler. Could there be much worse than taking a standard definition 4:3 tv show blown up to 1080 16:9!!

Never mind Queens birthday weekend coming up and thats bound to equal SALES!!. See Bond and Bond have a 50 inch Panasonic HD ready plasma for $1599 and 30 months to pay!.

langers1972

1039 posts

Uber Geek

#337875 3-Jun-2010 15:34

lissie:Thanks thats useful advice re the case - I hadn't thought of that .

I'd second that, I bought a Panny LCD with a gloss surround and it's the only thing I hate about the TV, can be very distracting

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6