$500-$750, plasma or LED?

[zCypher]

I won't claim to know much about TVs, but I have experience watching an LG and a Samsung (59" in both cases I believe), both plasma and both look pretty nice to me. There's also a 55" Samsung LED (I think), also looks pretty nice but I find that things always look kind of fake on their TV, not sure how to describe that but I'm sure others have noticed something like that too?

Anyhow, I have some "points" that I've earned at work which I can cash out in the form of various gift cards or items. While the points don't amount to enough to buy any nice TVs from the site at work, I can get a Future Shop gift card for $500 which goes a long way to a TV there! I'd like to surprise the gf with a new TV to watch the superbowl (yes, *she* wants to watch the superbowl, I really have no interest in football). She currently has a crappy old CRT.

What I've found so far is that any TVs around $500ish are either cheap knockoffs, or they are only 720p. Getting closer to $700-750 I see some 50-55" 1080p, which I think would be perfect for her basement. I'm not all too concerned about the performance with lots of light, as it will pretty much always be dark down there. Just need some guidance on how to select the best set!

Haven't done extensive research on it, but http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/prod...spx?path=a5ea828391e1172ad908ba594d7efadden02 seems to have an ok review on cnet. Comments? There is also this LG, http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/prod...spx?path=9ae00575c6daeefcbcda7ac38b4a20daen02. Is an LED (example: http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/prod...spx?path=ddebb5e34951dd4d2ffb6c10f6e1f801en02) of the same price range comparable?

Is there a big reason to sway in favor of either plasma or LED? Help me make up my mind!

Any tips, suggestions, input of any kind all welcome!

 

[Zivic]

LED is LCD. Don't be fooled

in your price range get the highest end panny plasma you can afford

 

[zCypher]

Thanks for the reply Zivic. Funny you say that, the Panasonic Viera TCP50U50 is at the top of the list so far. Not sure what the relevance is about LED being LCD though. Is that a bad thing?

 

[Kaido]

Thanks for the reply Zivic. Funny you say that, the Panasonic Viera TCP50U50 is at the top of the list so far. Not sure what the relevance is about LED being LCD though. Is that a bad thing?

So you basically have 2 types of flat-panel TV's:

1. LCD
2. Plasma

The new LCD televisions have LED backlighting. Partly what that means to you is they're cheap to run. Even the new 70" Vizio LED LCD TV only uses like 100 watts, which is about like a lightbulb, so they're pretty cheap to operate. Plus LED lighting lasts a long time, makes the TV set thinner and lighter, gives a brighter picture, and supposedly a better picture too.

Typically plasmas have better picture quality. Plasmas are making a comeback and have gotten way more efficient - a quick google on the Panasonic TCP50U50 you're looking at says it runs at 79 watts, which is pretty awesome. Not that it's a huge deal either way, because you're probably look at $20 a year to run them, maybe $100 if you leave them on all the time.

Anyway, the single best thing you can do is go to the store and look at them. Reading about ratings does help, but seeing them in person helps more. Usually you're seeing them on a showroom floor with lots of lights and they're usually not calibrated, but at least you can get an idea of the picture. And again, typically plasmas look the best, so if you can't see them, the TCP50U50 would be a great buy for you.

As far as the "unrealistic" thing you're talking about, a lot of the new 120hz LCD televisions have a feature called Smooth Motion or Auto Motion or something to that effect. It's also known as the "Soap Opera Effect" because it makes everything look like it was shot on a home video camera - way too smooth. Everyone I've talked to hates it and I think most sets allow you to turn it off. The idea was to eliminate ghosting in 24 frames-per-second movies, but instead it takes away that dream-like effect of movies and makes it look like an episode of COPS.

 

[Kaido]

Since you have a basement and light control isn't a big deal, have you considered a projector? You can get a huge screen that way, on a budget. I have a 720p LED projector, which is a new line of mini projectors (like the size of a piece of paper and only a couple inches tall) that use LED bulbs instead of regular bulbs (they last like 13 years of regular operation). Currently the budget ones like this are only available in 720p (not 1080p), but I really like mine.

They make 3 models, pretty much all the same - the Optoma ML500, the Viewsonic PLED-W500, and the Acer K330. I got the PLED-W500 because it supported 3D with an external box and glasses, but ultimately decided not to go with the 3D stuff, so I'd recommend the Optoma ML500 instead, which is about the same thing minus the HD 3D support, as well as being $75 cheaper. Currently it goes for $525 on Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Optomas-ML500-...dp/B00556F9I2/

So $525 gets you a 100" screen on a wall (or screen or white sheet); the picture size is based on distance and the Optoma can go from 17" up a huge 180", depending on how far back you can put the projector in the room. LED projectors are an emerging technology; mine isn't super bright, but because it's in a light-controlled basement, it's really great! Much more contrast than my previous bulb-based HD projector, but it doesn't heat up the room or take a long time to start up (2 second boot). Plus it's stupidly tiny, which is awesome. And if you're into sports, nothing beats watching the big game on a huge freakin' screen :awe: Here's some videos from Youtube: (this guy has a lot of uploads on the projector)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LQwR_c4wck

And with the lights off:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=508I3oNClZU

 

[Zivic]

So you basically have 2 types of flat-panel TV's:

1. LCD
2. Plasma

The new LCD televisions have LED backlighting. Partly what that means to you is they're cheap to run. Even the new 70" Vizio LED LCD TV only uses like 100 watts, which is about like a lightbulb, so they're pretty cheap to operate. Plus LED lighting lasts a long time, makes the TV set thinner and lighter, gives a brighter picture, and supposedly a better picture too.

with LED backlighting, the displays have gotten thinner, but LED is not always a plus. In the lower to mid ranges, especially as the screen sizes increase, LEDs can make the back lighting issues more apparent. They are being edge lit and trying to span a larger area. This means more back light bleed, flash lighting - basically less consistency throughout the display.

The other thing about LED, especially in lower to mid range is that they have a tenancy to be higher kelvin. Thus giving the picture even more blue. Look at a screen with white. A hockey game, maybe skiing with snow and look at how blue the whites are. most manufacturers already have a blue bias and LED's doubled down on that

LED's do last a long time, but so do CCFL that light LCD displays. I haven't read up too much in the last yr or so, but you look at the expected life of the LCD panel itself and it is likely around 50k hrs. Panny rates theirs to 100k. Either way, something like the a board, or power supply will likely fail before the panel.

Plasma is the tech to buy if you are looking for picture quality. You have to buy high end LCD to get comparable PQ as a plasma. Stick with panasonic and you will get a decent display

 

[Kaido]

with LED backlighting, the displays have gotten thinner, but LED is not always a plus. In the lower to mid ranges, especially as the screen sizes increase, LEDs can make the back lighting issues more apparent. They are being edge lit and trying to span a larger area. This means more back light bleed, flash lighting - basically less consistency throughout the display.

The other thing about LED, especially in lower to mid range is that they have a tenancy to be higher kelvin. Thus giving the picture even more blue. Look at a screen with white. A hockey game, maybe skiing with snow and look at how blue the whites are. most manufacturers already have a blue bias and LED's doubled down on that

LED's do last a long time, but so do CCFL that light LCD displays. I haven't read up too much in the last yr or so, but you look at the expected life of the LCD panel itself and it is likely around 50k hrs. Panny rates theirs to 100k. Either way, something like the a board, or power supply will likely fail before the panel.

Plasma is the tech to buy if you are looking for picture quality. You have to buy high end LCD to get comparable PQ as a plasma. Stick with panasonic and you will get a decent display

Yup, that's why I attached the "supposedly" to the 'better picture' line, haha

And I'm always amazed at consumer desires...my living room TV is a Mitsubishi DLP, one of the best pictures I've ever seen. The front is flat, but it's 17" deep or so. But sales have been so bad that they've killed off the entire product line. Most people are willing to take a crappier picture that they can hang on their wall, or that has the cool "thinness" factor, than go for something larger with a better picture. That's not to say that flatscreen TV's have bad pictures, but my DLP trumps nearly every other set I've seen, and was only $599 for a 60" screen. I dunno.

Totally agree with your recommendation - go with a Panasonic plasma and you'll probably be happy with whichever you get

 

[Zivic]

Yup, that's why I attached the "supposedly" to the 'better picture' line, haha

And I'm always amazed at consumer desires...

people get caught up in the new/best/next thing. "LED" is the poster boy of that. They have completely changed peoples view on displays. They no longer even mention LCD, just like the OP... it's now "LED", but it is still the same old panel tech they have been looking at for yrs.

 

[zCypher]

Finally got my gift card, so I'm hoping to make a purchase pretty soon. I was recommended to look at this set: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applicatio...FWKCQgodwAkAoA

Still not decided. The Panasonic is $50 cheaper than the first time I looked at it, so it can be had for $699 now. Still considering that one!

 

[amdhunter]

Let me tell you a story about my LG Plasma. Bought it maybe 3 years ago. It started showing retention issues in it's first year. Once in a blue moon, I can notice some trailing on the screen, and it clamps awful when using my PS3 or PC hooked up to it.

But even with those issues, being only 720p, and a cheap panel, it destroys any LCD I've seen. It makes my, very highly regarded, LG 47LW5600 3D 1080p panel look like absolute crap. And I spent a LOT of time adjusting my LCD. A LOT.

Only reason I got an LCD is because this TV will spend it's life connected to a computer screen, and that is a bad thing for plasmas.

 

[reallyscrued]

Just bought a Panasonic U50 within your price range, hopefully will bring it home today.

This will be my first plasma so I'm interested to see if this heavily touted display technology lives up to all of the hype.

There are no local dimming LED displays in this price range (which I was really looking forward to as that's the only PQ enhancement LED lighting can bring) and seems like a huge missed opportunity from manufacturers.

I'd settle for a 40 inch local dimming LED TV for ~500 but alas, no luck. Seems like people are more concerned with 3D, 120 hz soap opera motion and smart TV functions, or maybe manufacturers can add those features for a minimal price and get greater returns. I'd gladly give up those features for better picture.

The Samsung U50 seemed to be a great compromise, no internet connectivity, no 3D, just great picture (or so I'm told).

 

[Fallen Kell]

Plus LED lighting lasts a long time, makes the TV set thinner and lighter, gives a brighter picture, and supposedly a better picture too.

Only when they use RGB LED lights. The "white" LED light is not exactly "white", as it has a lot of blue shift. This means that the LCD can not produce colors as accurately when using "white" LED backlights, and/or can not produce some colors at all. When RGB LEDs are used, the LCD can produce a very wide color spectrum which does indeed allow for a better picture, but I have not seen them in use yet on a production LCD TV due to cost (it is more then triple the cost of the backlight matrix due to using 3 LEDs for every "white" LED, as well as the additional costs involved in uniformity control, and wiring the additional LEDs).

 

[Fallen Kell]

There are no local dimming LED displays in this price range (which I was really looking forward to as that's the only PQ enhancement LED lighting can bring) and seems like a huge missed opportunity from manufacturers.

I agree with you 100%, but local dimming requires a pulse-width modulation circuit matrix to each and every LED and also requires the LEDs to physically be behind the LCD and not use a waveguide channel from the edge (hence edge-lit), which makes the TV's thicker (and requires more LEDs). And for some reason all the marketing guys simply want to show thinner and thinner TV's....

 

[reallyscrued]

I agree with you 100%, but local dimming requires a pulse-width modulation circuit matrix to each and every LED and also requires the LEDs to physically be behind the LCD and not use a waveguide channel from the edge (hence edge-lit), which makes the TV's thicker (and requires more LEDs). And for some reason all the marketing guys simply want to show thinner and thinner TV's....

Yeah, I'm fine with a few extra inches of thickness if it leads to better black levels. Who the hell looks at the back of a TV? Too bad thin is in.

Anyway, I got my U50 Panny Plasma. Right in the middle of OP's price range. This is my first plasma; I was excited for this TV, man was I excited...

Here are my impressions after two days with it:

Blacks are pretty much true black. Obviously this is the biggest difference coming from a CCFL LCD TV. I've forgotten what blacks like this look like, it looks like a CRT honestly. If there are any black areas, it's pitch dark, and it's glorious.

It has a loud buzz when displaying a lot of white.

It flickers if you dart your eyes across the screen too fast.

Dithering is visible if you sit too close, and sometimes can be distracting from even far away. Dancing pixels is an artifact/technique that is really hard to get used to coming from an LCD (where pixels are just the color they need to be).

Color is way off. In cinema mode, I have to turn tint to the red side (-10 from middle) and then turn color down to 40 (scale of 100) to get flesh tones to look accurate. At that point, all the colors on the picture are dulled out.

Line bleed, holy hell, the line bleed. Inherent to plasmas, or so I read. Dragging a window vertically down my desktop causes all my icons on the very left to change colors as the window moves passed it. Google results have gray and green dark spots across the page because of the use of Blue links and green subtext.

I noticed it in movies too, as a person's arm would move across a window or something green, he would shade everything slightly darker exactly horizontally to the left and right of the screen with his arm.

Conclusions:

Black level =/= picture quality.

The Plasma fanboys have overblown the advantages of a plasma to other technologies. Black level should not be the end all of picture quality. Picture quality entails so many other things other than just seeing black correctly, and it seems clear to me that unless I am willing to pay upwards of $2,000 for a high end Panasonic Plasma, dealing with the bottom-of-the-rung models aren't satisfactory. This TV is going back.

 

[JackBurton]

Only when they use RGB LED lights. The "white" LED light is not exactly "white", as it has a lot of blue shift. This means that the LCD can not produce colors as accurately when using "white" LED backlights, and/or can not produce some colors at all. When RGB LEDs are used, the LCD can produce a very wide color spectrum which does indeed allow for a better picture, but I have not seen them in use yet on a production LCD TV due to cost (it is more then triple the cost of the backlight matrix due to using 3 LEDs for every "white" LED, as well as the additional costs involved in uniformity control, and wiring the additional LEDs).

Sony's XBR8 released in 2008 was RGB LED backlit. One of the best LCD's ever produced with an equally impressive price tag (55" - $7K).

 

[zCypher]

I ended up going with the Panasonic UT50.

I really appreciate the experience you shared, reallyscrued. I hope that won't be the case for this one, yikes. Anyway, it will be delivered next Thursday so I will set it up for the gf and see how it goes.

 

[reallyscrued]

I ended up going with the Panasonic UT50.

I really appreciate the experience you shared, reallyscrued. I hope that won't be the case for this one, yikes. Anyway, it will be delivered next Thursday so I will set it up for the gf and see how it goes.

My pleasure.


...but now I'm on the fence of taking it back. Actually, more so leaning toward not at all.

The flicker is no longer there. No idea what happened to it but my assumption now is that my pc was at 30 hz or something for a random period of time and I never bothered to check.

Either I've gotten used to it or the set settles down with use, but dithering is not an issue anymore. It's virtually nonexistent now from my seating position.

Last but not least, (and what makes me the most happy) the colors are not off anymore.

Found this thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1412033/the-official-panasonic-ut50-settings-issues-thread/600

With those instructions, you can go into the hidden 'service' menu and change white balance for red/blue/green individually. Finally got skin tones and grayscale to look correct...well, as correct as a plasma can get. They really should have put those options in the regular menu; I've read many people return this TV because of a green tint to people's skin they couldn't get rid of.

I set my Rcut, Gcut, and Bcut to 80 (0-255 values in hex, 80 is halfway) then fiddled with Rdrive, Gdrive, and Bdrive until I got a picture that I was satisfied with. I might have it a bit on the cool side (for example, the gray backgrounds on this forum appears slightly blue, like on my Laptop) but I find that more satisfying and I feel a lot more at home with this white balance.

Oh, and I almost forgot....gaming. No, motion blur, or input lag, PERIOD. Don't know if I can go back to gaming on an LCD after this.


Decent TV. Panasonic Plasma U/UT50.

 

[Kaido]

people get caught up in the new/best/next thing. "LED" is the poster boy of that. They have completely changed peoples view on displays. They no longer even mention LCD, just like the OP... it's now "LED", but it is still the same old panel tech they have been looking at for yrs.

I was at Best Buy the other day and they had the Insignia house brand of LCD's on sale...39" LCD for $299 and 39" LED LCD for $399, I believe. The non-LED looked significantly better and was $100 cheaper, although it didn't have the nice thinness of the LED model.

But, it depends on what you're going for. I just snagged that 50" Coby LED LCD for $399 for my dad's new computer monitor/TV and it's really nice because it's like 40 pounds for wall-mounting. My old 42" non-LED is almost 75 pounds. Huge difference.

 

[hans030390]

The main thing that stands out for me with plasmas compared to LCD/LED is the lack of ghosting and motion blur, lower input lag, and black levels. I prefer plasma.

 

[zCypher]

Alright so the TV was delivered, I'll be helping the gf get everything all set up in a few days. Not sure what receiver to get though. When I helped my mom put her home theatre together, she ended up going for an Onkyo (receiver + 7.1 set), I think it was about $500. It's alright I guess. Seems to sound decent enough, not really mind blowing but nothing to complain about and a hell of a lot nicer than just the TV speakers.

Can you guys recommend some decent receivers/speakers? They don't necessarily have to be an all in one set.