Discussion: 'IF' plasma is better, why is it so cheap?

Forums › Home Theatre › Discussion: 'IF' plasma is better, why is it so cheap?

testing123

176 posts

Master Geek

Topic # 83082 10-May-2011 10:56

Long time since i bought my flatscreen (nearly 3 years ago) - i was under the assumption at the time that plasma was on it's way out, so LCD was the way to go back then. turns out Things have changed...

Now I'm helping the inlaws pimp out their house - ironicly, recommendations on TV's these days have been coming in for plasma.

Looking at a 50-55inch, budget hasn't been set, but i'd say sensibly anything under 3k. A lot of 50inch units at 1800-2k when their LED/LCD counterparts go at a notably higher pricetag. Is plasma still old tech that retail will sell at a lowwer price to clear their stock, or is it cheaper to produce?

Sub-topic (if you can be bothered) Anyone care to shed light, or offer the CURRENT pro's and cons of the technology? Apologies: i know it's an old topic thats been rehashed a hundred times on GZ alone, but i thought best to get some 2011 perspective.

Thanks

1 | 2

Professional yak shaver
1598 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7

Trusted

BitSignal

Subscriber

Reply # 467450 10-May-2011 11:01

What are you going to watch on it?

"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads." - Doc Emmet Brown

testing123

176 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 467454 10-May-2011 11:07

good question:

They'll be watching a LOT of sport via MySky.

...and inevitably a few other channels on the mysky also: whilst a blu-ray player will be bought, i doubt it'll get much use (current dvd player has been collecting dust).

magu

Professional yak shaver
1598 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7

Trusted

BitSignal

Subscriber

Reply # 467457 10-May-2011 11:17

testing123: good question:

They'll be watching a LOT of sport via MySky.

...and inevitably a few other channels on the mysky also: whilst a blu-ray player will be bought, i doubt it'll get much use (current dvd player has been collecting dust).

Plasmas are cheaper because they're less energy-efficient than comparables LCDs (LED TVs are LCDs as well, but with better backlighting).

However, the black levels (the difference in brightness between a white pixel and a black pixel on the screen) of a good Plasma will always beat the best black level of the comparable LCD/LED because the Plasma doesn't backlighting, meaning higher contrast on Plasmas.

The first plasma screens had 'burn-in' issues, which caused the image to be permanently etched into the glass. This seems to have been solved now, with pixel-shifting and other techniques implemented by plasma panel manufacturers.

Also, because they use glass, plasma screens are not as versatile when sitting in a room full of windows: they tend to reflect light more than LCD screens, which are usually matte.

I own a Plasma because I enjoy the better contrast for movies, and I'm ok with closing the curtains to watch TV.

"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads." - Doc Emmet Brown

xpd

Geek,gamer,father
8202 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1073

Mod Emeritus

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 467462 10-May-2011 11:23

I just got a Panasonic TH-P50U20Z for under $1500 from JB (Full HD etc etc) - we got that one because a) Price was good (incs 3 yr warranty not that they matter these days ;) ) b) We have an earlier and lower end model that we think is brilliant, so couldnt go wrong upgrading ;)

Watched Toy Story 3 blu-ray on it last night via the PS3, and wow, huge difference in picture :D

XPD / @DemiseNZ / Gavin

Corsair Carbide SPEC-02 / Corsair VS550 / G.SKILL Ripjaws X 8GB / Zotac 760GTX AMP! / ASUS H81M-E / Intel Pentium K Anniversay G3258 @3.9Ghz

Logitech G400S Mouse / SteelSeries Apex Raw Keyboard / Logitech G933 Headphones / Samsung S23C300L Monitor / Zalman Z-Machine Mouse Mat

Internet provided by : Voyager - VDSL 65/28 - Musical Support by : Like A Storm - Visual Entertainment by : Plex and Steam and Overwatch

magu

Professional yak shaver
1598 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7

Trusted

BitSignal

Subscriber

Reply # 467465 10-May-2011 11:28

xpd: I just got a Panasonic TH-P50U20Z for under $1500 from JB (Full HD etc etc) - we got that one because a) Price was good (incs 3 yr warranty not that they matter these days ;) ) b) We have an earlier and lower end model that we think is brilliant, so couldnt go wrong upgrading ;)

Watched Toy Story 3 blu-ray on it last night via the PS3, and wow, huge difference in picture :D

I've got an old TH-P42X20Z I got for $998 on Boxing Day from HN. Agree with you: can't go wrong at that price and sticking with Panasonic.

"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads." - Doc Emmet Brown

1080p

1332 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152
Inactive user

Reply # 467470 10-May-2011 11:37

: magu Plasmas are cheaper because they're less energy-efficient than comparables LCDs (LED TVs are LCDs as well, but with better backlighting).

That does not make sense. Why would plasma technology be cheaper because it is less energy efficient?

In general plasma technology is on its last foot. Major manufacturers have all but stopped research and development and we should see a huge reduction in panel production in the near future.

LCD technology has come a long way since it was first introduced, as has plasma. Both are very good solutions for televisions but LCD has, at least in the realm of the general consumer, surpassed plasma in all aspects. This is why you'll be seeing a higher price tag on LED LCD as opposed to plasma.

Where you see a difference in contrast and colour reproduction is in the _very_ high end plasma models; think top of the professional line of Panasonic or Pioneer. None of the general consumer models are better than their LCD counterparts and the new range of IPS based consumer LCD panels are excellent.

I always recommend LCD over plasma unless you have a 10k+ budget and money to hire a professional colour calibrator.

Handle9

1556 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 475

Subscriber

Reply # 467474 10-May-2011 11:46

magu:
xpd: I just got a Panasonic TH-P50U20Z for under $1500 from JB (Full HD etc etc) - we got that one because a) Price was good (incs 3 yr warranty not that they matter these days ;) ) b) We have an earlier and lower end model that we think is brilliant, so couldnt go wrong upgrading ;)

Watched Toy Story 3 blu-ray on it last night via the PS3, and wow, huge difference in picture :D

I've got an old TH-P42X20Z I got for $998 on Boxing Day from HN. Agree with you: can't go wrong at that price and sticking with Panasonic.

I just (a month ago) upgraded to a TH-P50V20Z for $1800 (Harvey Norman) from a TH-42PV8. I would agree with everything said. Plasmas obviously don't have the range that LCDs do (nothing below 42 inch) but for bigger sizes the price:performance is far superior for plasma at bigger sizes.

I think the price difference has a lot to do with supply and demand. Plasmas screens are pretty much only used for TVs - LCDs are on everything from watches to airplanes.

clevedon

780 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 75

Reply # 467495 10-May-2011 12:15

I'll always buy Plasma, I just don't like the "picture" of LCD/LED whether it be for Blu-ray, HD Sports or gaming - it just looks false to my eyes.

scuwp

2706 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1146

Reply # 467523 10-May-2011 12:57

For the bigger sizes plasma gets my vote. I thought they were cheaper because they were older technology, and as mentioned they are not going to change to much now. Less R&D = cheaper products.

One thing I wish I was told was how much heat they can put out! The upside I guess is that it can help heat your house in winter.

Going big...can't beat a plasma IMO for performance and value for money

Always be yourself, unless you can be Batman, then always be the Batman

oxnsox

1923 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 139

Reply # 467535 10-May-2011 13:19

Technologies aside there will always be a crossover pricepoint for manufacturers Plasma-V-LCD. Once upon a time it used to be around the 37" point but its moved up well past that.

Now, I think, the major cost driver is energy efficiency. I've been told that EU regulations call for much improved efficiencies over current models. And whilst that sounds like the sort of thing that 'makes-sense' I can't recall where I had that discussion.

Jaxson

6449 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 493

Trusted

Reply # 467563 10-May-2011 13:58

Plasma is heavier as it has real glass on the front.
It also generates more heat.

LCD's initially had refresh rate issues but this has largely been addressed now.
Plasma's didn't ever have this issue to a major degree.

Plasma works by turning individual pixles on and off. The 'pixels' themselves make light.

LCD works by having a light on and closing the curtains over that pixel. Some light does get through so the black levels aren't as good. This is being seriuosly addressed now with LED backlighting where they can turn the lights off in certain areas if it's supposed to be black.

Anyway, that's the background to the black level idea.

As Panasonic / Samgung are still producing Plasma, in 3D form now too, I think it's a bit premature to write it off straight away. It's been written off before though so feel free to give it a go.

It appears to be a lot cheaper to make a large screen in the Plasma style. I don't know why, probably limited to the size of the LCD panels they could make at the time. It still appears cheaper to get a Plasma for a given size then LCD. You don't get small Plasma screens. I don't think price in an accurate indication of quality between the two, it's just the nature of the different build techniques/technologies.

As TV's get bigger though, so do the pixels. Really the 1080P resolution should increase as the screen does but this doesn't happen. So whilst bigger is better most of the time. If you sit really close to a big screen you're gonna see bigger pixels than a smaller screen which is something to think about.

testing123

176 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 467566 10-May-2011 14:04

Thanks for all the input, recommendations, corrections and confirmations: I'm a MUCH clearer on the situation now :)

Getting some serious urges to buy a new TV for myself whilst helping the inlaws... Dangerous topics, these are!

jjnz1

1041 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 65

Subscriber

Reply # 467570 10-May-2011 14:12

I am a LCD fan, and thats what I normally recommend to clients/family etc.
The main (picture) differences between good plasmas and LCD have all but gone, with in my opinion LCD now edging slightly ahead..

That said Samsung's new Plasma range of 3D TV's are amazing.

I have just scored a 58inch 7 Series 3D Plasma (PS58C7000) for $2430+GST, normally $3820+GST. I don't think you can go wrong with Samsung.

Dunnersfella

3183 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 378

Reply # 467584 10-May-2011 14:46

Jaxson:
As Panasonic / Samgung are still producing Plasma, in 3D form now too, I think it's a bit premature to write it off straight away. It's been written off before though so feel free to give it a go.

It still appears cheaper to get a Plasma for a given size then LCD. You don't get small Plasma screens. I don't think price in an accurate indication of quality between the two, it's just the nature of the different build techniques/technologies.

Finally - something to agree with in this thread!

There are A LOT of generalisations in this thread AND when you go into a store to buy a TV.
People who say 'LCD's work better in well lit rooms' aren't always right. Sure IPS panels from LG and Panasonic, and matte finished panels from Sony work well - but Samsung's LCD's and LED lit LCD's are as glossy as an entry level plasma... sometimes more so. Sharp LED lit LCD's are even glossier, to the point that they need VERY careful placement within the room. Sure LED lit LCD's have higher overall luminescence that helps counter direct light sources shining on the panel, but they simply can't compete with a matte finished LED version in this area. Something people often don't realise / get told.
Plasmas 'typically' have very shiny screens due to the nature of their glass panels, but the likes of Panasonic V20 / VT20 / GT20 / ST30 / GT30 and VT30 plasmas have far, far better filters than many LED lit LCD's.
Confused?
Well I did mention generalisations earlier eh?

The other thing people miss in the plasma / LCD debate are...
Connectivity (LED's have next to no legacy connections, whereas many 2010 Pana plasmas have pretty much anything you could think of, on the back).
Viewing angles. Plasma's rule - Sony LCD's drool... Everyone else sits somewhere in the middle.
If they watch movies at night or not (LED's can suffer from torch lighting around the black bars at the top and bottom of the screen.
How the TV is going to be mounted... on a stand, will there be pre-wiring if it's going on a wall? What sort of wiring is it? Will it work with the new TV? I've seen homes wired purely for S-Video... and that immediately cuts down options.
The speakers! LED lit LCD's can have terrible speakers, some, have quite passable speakers... And if you want to connect it to an older home theatre system (without optical inputs) you might be stuck! Panasonic + Sony have kept 'speaker boxes' at the bottom of their LED's, where LG, Samsung and Sharp have dropped any semblance of decent sound. Note: If you've got a compatible home theatre system, then this point is mute obviously).

Then there's the basic crap that any old sales person will go on about... 'Full HD vs HD Ready, 50Hz vs 100Hz vs 200Hz etc'. When really, the odds that your family will be able to spot the difference between 50 and 100Hz are very small... they will certainly notice sun-strike on the screen and crappy sound.

Heck - if a store was to remove any mention of 'plasma, LED or LCD' from their point of sale guff, then 99% of people wouldn't be able to tell the difference just by looking.
My advice - don't walk into a store and ask 'what's better, LCD or Plasma'... walk in and ask "What's the best TV for me?" Beware of a sales person who immediately answers with one technology over another. They SHOULD ask about your room, your gear, your viewing habits etc etc etc.

testing123

176 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 467599 10-May-2011 15:06

The room we're pimping out is being built as we speak (half the house is being renovated, lounge is now in an extension) so will be wired into the wall for HDMI from the hometheatre to the wall-mounted TV, and a multi-room audio set up wired into the walls too.

The main point of interest will be how light the room is when the walls are all in: then i'll know how much of a factor the glare issue will be when we're in store.

All great points, thanks again.

1 | 2