3 42" & 1 40" 1080P LCDs...which would you choose?

[NTB]

Any reason to pick one over another (other than price)?

LG 42LB5D

Toshiba Regza 42HL167

Sharp Aquos LC-42D62U

Sony KDL40V2500

And no wimping out with "I'd go for a bigger one"

 

[mshan]

What about Samsung (I thought they made Sonys LCD panels anyways?)

 

[dwell]

Samsung LN-T4061 or LN-T4065. Best LCDs on the market hands down. The 4061 is a matte screen where the 4065 is a glossy screen.

 

[DBL]

Personally, I'd get the Panasonic TH-42PZ700U 42" Plasma though. It will make a noticeably better picture than any of your LCD'd listed.

 

[venkman]

58" Pansonic Plasma 720p for $200 more than the Sony.

1080p > 720p but 58" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 42"

 

[dwell]

Who would have guessed the Plasma Nazis would invade this thread?

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: Chris
Who would have guessed the Plasma Nazis would invade this thread?

Glad you could bring such valuable suggestions and experience to the discussion.

BTW, I own both technologies (the 42" 62u Aqous and the 700u series Panasonic). The Plasma is clearly better. The sharp can produce a very nice picture but side by side, it's no contest.

Which Tv/Tech do you own? That may explain your hostility.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: DBL
BTW, I own both technologies (the 42" 62u Aqous and the 700u series Panasonic). The Plasma is clearly better. The sharp can produce a very nice picture but side by side, it's no contest.

It's not hostility. The problem is the guy asked which LCD he should get and sure as spit the Plasma Defense Force showed up to declare Plasma as the superior technology.

Which Tv/Tech do you own? That may explain your hostility.

I have a Sammy 4665F. It replaced my Sammy 4695D. I could have chosen to go with Plasma after owning the LCD for two months. After much research I chose to stick with LCD because:

1) I want to watch TV, not worry about if what I watch is going to harm my TV.

2) I didn't want to have to break in my TV.

3) LCD is more versatile than Plasma. I will be using it for TV, games, and as a monitor. IMO, LCD has Plasma beat in the versatility department.

4) Plasma does not come in 46".

5) 1080p Plasmas are just emerging now and 1024x768 and 1,366x768 are not mapped 1:1

6) With a contrast ratio of 1500:1 (native) and 15,000:1 (dynamic), Plasma has little advantage over the 2007 crop of LCDs when it comes to picture quality.

 

[venkman]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: DBL
BTW, I own both technologies (the 42" 62u Aqous and the 700u series Panasonic). The Plasma is clearly better. The sharp can produce a very nice picture but side by side, it's no contest.

It's not hostility. The problem is the guy asked which LCD he should get and sure as spit the Plasma Defense Force showed up to declare Plasma as the superior technology.

Which Tv/Tech do you own? That may explain your hostility.

I have a Sammy 4665F. It replaced my Sammy 4695D. I could have chosen to go with Plasma after owning the LCD for two months. After much research I chose to stick with LCD because:

1) I want to watch TV, not worry about if what I watch is going to harm my TV.

2) I didn't want to have to break in my TV.

3) LCD is more versatile than Plasma. I will be using it for TV, games, and as a monitor. IMO, LCD has Plasma beat in the versatility department.

4) Plasma does not come in 46".

5) 1080p Plasmas are just emerging now and 1024x768 and 1,366x768 are not mapped 1:1

6) With a contrast ratio of 1500:1 (native) and 15,000:1 (dynamic), Plasma has little advantage over the 2007 crop of LCDs when it comes to picture quality.

I don't care if he is planning on watching TV though a hole cut out of a cardboard box.

58" >>>>> 42"

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: Chris
It's not hostility. The problem is the guy asked which LCD he should get and sure as spit the Plasma Defense Force showed up to declare Plasma as the superior technology.

Perhaps he does not realize that 1080p Plasmas are now available? Just providing some suggestions to make a more informed decision. If he wants to ONLY consider LCD for some bizarre reason, good for him.

I have a Sammy 4665F. It replaced my Sammy 4695D. I could have chosen to go with Plasma after owning the LCD for two months. After much research I chose to stick with LCD because:

1) I want to watch TV, not worry about if what I watch is going to harm my TV.

Misinformation.

2) I didn't want to have to break in my TV.

I didn't with either of my TVs.

3) LCD is more versatile than Plasma. I will be using it for TV, games, and as a monitor. IMO, LCD has Plasma beat in the versatility department.

huh?

4) Plasma does not come in 46".

LCD does not come in 50". your point?

5) 1080p Plasmas are just emerging now and 1024x768 and 1,366x768 are not mapped 1:1

IOW, this is now a non-issue for a 1080p plasma.

6) With a contrast ratio of 1500:1 (native) and 15,000:1 (dynamic), Plasma has little advantage over the 2007 crop of LCDs when it comes to picture quality.

Contrast ratio is akin to the wattage rating of a receiver. It's a worthless measurement measured in as many different ways as there are manufacturers. LCD picture quality has gotten better but is still noticeably behind (when compared in a home setting) the latest crop of plasmas being released by Panasonic and Pioneer.

Either way, not to get too far off track, I was just making a suggestion. The OP can purchase what he wants but if picture quality is his most important factor, IMO, he should choose plasma.