• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

LCD big screens make no sense

M

micrometers

Diamond Member
Because plasma is so very good.

Black levels are actually pretty important, especially on movies that end up letterboxed.

Motion is better.

I'm comparing a Viera Plasma to a Dell IPS computer monitor, watching the same blu ray movie. The LCD I guess might be "crisper" but overall the plasma is much much better. Plasma is arguably better than movie theater projection too.

Probably the only area where LCD is better is in passive 3d.
 
karmypolitics said:
Because plasma is so very good.

Black levels are actually pretty important, especially on movies that end up letterboxed.

Motion is better.

I'm comparing a Viera Plasma to a Dell IPS computer monitor, watching the same blu ray movie. The LCD I guess might be "crisper" but overall the plasma is much much better. Plasma is arguably better than movie theater projection too.

Probably the only area where LCD is better is in passive 3d.
Click to expand...

Except Plasma screens are pretty much pointless in a living room (or any room for that matter) with large windows, especially if tv gets any direct sunlight near it.

You are also comparing a TV to a Monitor, of course the TV will look better. Go compare that Plasma next to a Series 7 or Series 8 Samsung (or actually any Samsung of the same value really)
 
Last edited:
Don't forget about how much power each unit uses as well. I know some of the LED LCD screens are starting to get pretty efficient.
 
I've spent the week playing with the LG 55'' 3D LED smart TVs work got me for the studio. I must say that while plasma is still the best, I'm thoroughly impressed.
 
In terms of bright-room watching, LED/LCD sets are definitely better for the most part, but it's also a matter of preference.
 
There's also the physical weight of a plasma vs that of an LCD. But that doesn't really matter much beyond just moving the thing.
 
Depends on what a person seeks in his (or her) TV. As much as I like my Pannie plasma (picture and price), some of my visitors have picked up that it is not as sharp as a typical LCDs and there is also slight buzzing when displaying 1080p materials. Color palette is easily superior to LCDs however.
 
gar655 said:
As long as you sit directly in the middle and don't mind paying more than double the price it would be a "great" choice.
Click to expand...

The viewing angles are actually pretty good on the Elite. Not as good as a plasma, but I'd take it over Panasonic's IR issues, weaker black levels (although very decent), and did I mention it comes in a larger size? So yeah, a better performing, larger display cost more. What a shocker.
 
Last edited:
Phanuel said:
There's also the physical weight of a plasma vs that of an LCD. But that doesn't really matter much beyond just moving the thing.
Click to expand...
Modern plasmas are maybe a tad thicker and heavier than modern lcds. Not as big of a deal as it may have been in the past.
 
JackBurton said:
The viewing angles are actually pretty good on the Elite. Not as good as a plasma, but I'd take it over Panasonic's IR issues, weaker black levels (although very decent), and did I mention it comes in a larger size? So yeah, a better performing, larger display cost more. What a shocker.
Click to expand...

The most important factor in picture quality is contrast. The Elite has better dynamic contrast (65000 vs 15000) while the Panasonic has better native contrast (11000 vs 6000). Generally speaking, native contrast is more important, unless you watch scenes where everything is dark and dynamic contrast really kicks in.

IR doesn't detract from picture quality at all. Yes LCDs have the advantage of not having to worry about IR and being more suitable as a computer monitor, but that doesn't equate to better picture quality. On the other hand, not being able to display cyan correctly is bad for image quality.

If the Elite is better, how come it didn't win the shootout? It is because all the reviewers are biased against the Elite?

In any case, the Elite vs Panasonic argument is moot, because neither or them comes close to OLED in picture quality. Why spend so much money on the Elite when you can get an OLED for the same price in 12 months? If someone offered you to swap your Elite for a Panasonic, and use it for 12 months, then upgrade it to an OLED for free, would you take the offer?
 
JackBurton said:
The viewing angles are actually pretty good on the Elite. Not as good as a plasma, but I'd take it over Panasonic's IR issues, weaker black levels (although very decent), and did I mention it comes in a larger size? So yeah, a better performing, larger display cost more. What a shocker.
Click to expand...

The other thing I should point is that while I think the Elite has very good viewing angles, at 70", screen uniformity becomes a bigger concern. Whenever I see the Elite at the store, I can see the loss of contrast and color fidelity starting at about 5" from the corners.

While most of us don't pay close attention to the corners when watching actual content, it still causes a loss of immersion. Regardless of how good the display is in other areas, you get the sense that you're looking through a window with imperfect glass. On a plasma, it looks like you're actually looking into open space.
 
JackBurton said:
but I'd take it over Panasonic's IR issues, ...and did I mention it comes in a larger size?
Click to expand...
What? What IR issues? I`ve had my 50" VT25 for 18 months now. No IR issues to speak of.

And come on. 70" vs 65". Pretty much splitting hairs there.
 
Railgun said:
What? What IR issues? I`ve had my 50" VT25 for 18 months now. No IR issues to speak of.

And come on. 70" vs 65". Pretty much splitting hairs there.
Click to expand...

The 50 series Panasonic plasmas have an issue with IR, where older models dealt with it much better. It's like Panasonic is working backwards.
 
dookulooku said:
The most important factor in picture quality is contrast. The Elite has better dynamic contrast (65000 vs 15000) while the Panasonic has better native contrast (11000 vs 6000). Generally speaking, native contrast is more important, unless you watch scenes where everything is dark and dynamic contrast really kicks in.

IR doesn't detract from picture quality at all. Yes LCDs have the advantage of not having to worry about IR and being more suitable as a computer monitor, but that doesn't equate to better picture quality. On the other hand, not being able to display cyan correctly is bad for image quality.

If the Elite is better, how come it didn't win the shootout? It is because all the reviewers are biased against the Elite?

In any case, the Elite vs Panasonic argument is moot, because neither or them comes close to OLED in picture quality. Why spend so much money on the Elite when you can get an OLED for the same price in 12 months? If someone offered you to swap your Elite for a Panasonic, and use it for 12 months, then upgrade it to an OLED for free, would you take the offer?
Click to expand...

IR doesn't detract from picture quality? So a persistent channel logo hanging out at the bottom of your screen while watching a movie doesn't detract from picture quality? You're kidding, right?

As for the shootout, the Elite lost in the shootout because of its cyan issue which technically is an issue. However even with critical viewing it is VERY difficult to notice without another TV sitting right beside it. IR on the other hand WILL be easy to spot and is very distracting. And if anyone is in denial about the issue, you can read more about it here.

I'm not saying the Elite is perfect, however for me, the issues with the new Panasonic plasmas tip the scales in the Elite's favor. Did I mention the 3D on the Elite is outstanding? In the end, the main thing Panasonic has going for it is that it's cheaper. But I'd rather pay "a little" more for a larger display with fewer "major" (distracting) issues.

As for OLED vs LCD/plasma, good luck with that one. Technically OLED should blow the existing tech out of the water. But as you can see, there are MAJOR differences on how a manufacture implements the tech. I'm sure it will be a few years AFTER OLED is released before they work out most of the issues.
 
I'm own both technologies and am happy with both. My first HDTV was a Vizio plasma several years ago when they first came out. It was so long ago a 55" was around $1500 in 720P. While I initially liked I grew to hate, the damned thing was a giant heater. The amount of heat it put out was ridiculous. I then moved that to the bedroom and go a medium quality Sony LCD HDTV. It has a fantastic picture and didn't put out the heat the plasma did and I'm sure power usage was a lot lower. It still serves as my bedroom TV today.

Six months ago I bought my first house and needed a new living room TV. After a ton of research I ended up with a Pannie plasma. It's the midlevel model in 55"(ST I think, whatever the midlevel is). Picture quality is great as expected. One of the things that did irritate me with the Sony LCD and most I looked at was backlight bleed and not so black blacks. I game a good bit and most style I play are dark for the most part. Heat output is not noticeable. Power usage is very good for a plasma this size and not much more than a LCD. The final point that pushed me over the edge was I got a great deal on it. Found it onsale for ~$900, not bad for a TV that runs $1400 at Amazon and most other retailers.

One thing about plasma is glare. Mine is supposed to be the lowest glare on the market but their is still a noticable amount with certain lights on. I have my windows pretty much blacked out so I wasn't worried about it but if your room has a lot of windows that aren't don't even consider a plasma.

Image burn-in isn't an issue anymore. I game a lot and my I have younger kids that watch it a lot. I have no HUD burn-in or Nick Jr labels on my screen. At this point with todays plasma you almost have to try to get burn in.
 
JackBurton said:
The viewing angles are actually pretty good on the Elite. Not as good as a plasma, but I'd take it over Panasonic's IR issues, weaker black levels (although very decent), and did I mention it comes in a larger size? So yeah, a better performing, larger display cost more. What a shocker.
Click to expand...

The Panasonic VT series plasmas are equal to or better than any set available today for black level, plus better motion resolution, and MUCH better off angle viewing. And the 65 VT costs half of what the 70" Elite does.

Maybe you can find value in double the cost for the last 5 inches for what overall is NOT a better display, but I certainly cannot.

FWIW I do have a Sharp 70", last years 732. The picture on it is very nice but no better in anyway than my 4 yo panasonic plasma and worse in other ways. LCD has a ways to go before they are overall better than plasma.
 
732 has a poor picture compared the 734/735. I can't honestly say much one way or the other about plasma vs lcd though. I've never seen the hype over plasma. A properly calibrated LCD on a decent set can be pretty good. I love my 735.
 
gar655 said:
The Panasonic VT series plasmas are equal to or better than any set available today for black level, plus better motion resolution, and MUCH better off angle viewing. And the 65 VT costs half of what the 70" Elite does.

Maybe you can find value in double the cost for the last 5 inches for what overall is NOT a better display, but I certainly cannot.
Click to expand...

I've already explained why I rated the Elite a better display than the VT50 (or any 50 series Panasonic plasma). If you chose to ignore those points, that's up to you. As for black levels, let's just say I wouldn't want to take a step backwards with the Panasonic. That's why I'd consider the Elite for my replacement set. Panasonic isn't even an option.

FWIW I do have a Sharp 70", last years 732. The picture on it is very nice but no better in anyway than my 4 yo panasonic plasma and worse in other ways. LCD has a ways to go before they are overall better than plasma.
Click to expand...

The 732 is NOT an Elite.
 
JackBurton said:
You're right. That does sound like some hard core trolling right there.
Click to expand...

You needed to read the first line of the post to know that? From what I have seen in the recent past, the fact that the post was made by karmypolitics means that it's pretty much guaranteed to be a troll post...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top