• 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.

*UPDATED* New TV - Any reason not to wait?

D

dmw16

Diamond Member
I've gotten wife-approval for a new TV for our new house. We are tentatively scheduled to settle at the end of January.

I've decided on a plasma TV in the 50"-55" range. It looks like if I were to buy now I'd get a Kuro or Panasonic. A few people were saying in another thread that the Kuros are going fast. But is there any reason not to wait until closer to settlement to buy? I figure the technology will get better or the prices will drop. Or is there something I don't know?

THanks.

UPDATE
Found a Kuro for $1685 shipped (+$200 for the base). Is this a good enough deal to move on now?
 
Love the LED, but (at least currently) the $2700 price tag for the 55" doesn't really thrill me.

Also, that doesn't even begin to answer my question 🙂
 
Well the Kuro's are said to be ahead a few years of the panasonic. And they are no longer making them. I consider my Kuro an investment to be honest. Then again, I bought mine thinking they would be gone soon, and you can still buy one. So who knows how long it will take for them to be sold out. The question is, are you willing to settle for the Panny if the Kuros are gone in Jan?
 
Originally posted by: Riverhound777
Well the Kuro's are said to be ahead a few years of the panasonic. And they are no longer making them. I consider my Kuro an investment to be honest. Then again, I bought mine thinking they would be gone soon, and you can still buy one. So who knows how long it will take for them to be sold out. The question is, are you willing to settle for the Panny if the Kuros are gone in Jan?
Click to expand...

Panasonic did pick up the technology from Pioneer so expect the Pannies to top Kuros soon.
 
There is no reason not to wait. Whats the point of buying now when you don't need it yet. Now, if you see a killer deal on Black Friday, you might want to jump on that.
 
Thanks for the info. I sorta figured that Kuro technology would filter down to the Panasonics. And from the reviews, it doesn't sound like the Panasonics are bad.
 
Do you want the VERY best and pay for it = Kuro or do you want to save some and get 90% of the image quality = Panasonic

I'm very happy with my Panasonic TH50PZ85 that I got last Xmas. It was £700 cheaper then teh Kuro's at the time. That was a bit too much for me to swallow. If it was £200-250 I'd have gotten it but the extra £500 I spent on other stuff 😛

Koing
 
What about the Samsung B650's? Kind of thinking about replacing my aging Sony SXRD and for the price for plasmas at the moment they're hard to beat. From the reviews of the Samsung and Panasonic, seems Samsung has better colors but Panasonic has the better blacks.
 
Originally posted by: dmw16
I've gotten wife-approval for a new TV for our new house. We are tentatively scheduled to settle at the end of January.

I've decided on a plasma TV in the 50"-55" range. It looks like if I were to buy now I'd get a Kuro or Panasonic. A few people were saying in another thread that the Kuros are going fast. But is there any reason not to wait until closer to settlement to buy? I figure the technology will get better or the prices will drop. Or is there something I don't know?

THanks.

UPDATE
Found a Kuro for $1685 shipped (+$200 for the base). Is this a good enough deal to move on now?
Click to expand...

Plasma = suckage.

Picture quality is worse than any other technology, except for projection, and in many cases even projection is better.
Viewing angle = absolutely horrible. If your vertical viewing angle is 5 degrees from level half the screen will appear dark.
Power consumption is up to 3x more than a CRT the same size. I don't know what the electric rates are by you, but here in NYC the difference in price between an LCD or LED and a Plasma would be made up in 1 year of electrical costs if its on 4 hours a day.
 
Originally posted by: glugglug
Plasma = suckage.

Picture quality is worse than any other technology, except for projection, and in many cases even projection is better.
Viewing angle = absolutely horrible. If your vertical viewing angle is 5 degrees from level half the screen will appear dark.
Power consumption is up to 3x more than a CRT the same size. I don't know what the electric rates are by you, but here in NYC the difference in price between an LCD or LED and a Plasma would be made up in 1 year of electrical costs if its on 4 hours a day.
Click to expand...

Please disregard glugglug's entire post. I don't think there's any truth whatsoever in it. I'm sure that most of the regulars on this forum know this, but I just wanted to point it out in case someone new comes in.

PQ of plasma is BETTER than all other technologies. Viewing angle of plasma is practically perfect. The picture doesn't degrade when viewed from the sides. OTOH, rp and LCD are known for their poor viewing angles. Power consumption of new plasmas is on par with LCDs.

If you'd like to make any other completely ignorant posts, then I suggest the Off Topic forums.
 
Originally posted by: kalrith
Originally posted by: glugglug
Plasma = suckage.

Picture quality is worse than any other technology, except for projection, and in many cases even projection is better.
Viewing angle = absolutely horrible. If your vertical viewing angle is 5 degrees from level half the screen will appear dark.
Power consumption is up to 3x more than a CRT the same size. I don't know what the electric rates are by you, but here in NYC the difference in price between an LCD or LED and a Plasma would be made up in 1 year of electrical costs if its on 4 hours a day.
Click to expand...

Please disregard glugglug's entire post. I don't think there's any truth whatsoever in it. I'm sure that most of the regulars on this forum know this, but I just wanted to point it out in case someone new comes in.
Click to expand...
The viewing angle stuff is wacky, but he's not lying at all about the power consumption issues. Plasmas suck down a lot of juice, and can REALLY heat up a room.
 
Originally posted by: erwos
Originally posted by: kalrith
Originally posted by: glugglug
Plasma = suckage.

Picture quality is worse than any other technology, except for projection, and in many cases even projection is better.
Viewing angle = absolutely horrible. If your vertical viewing angle is 5 degrees from level half the screen will appear dark.
Power consumption is up to 3x more than a CRT the same size. I don't know what the electric rates are by you, but here in NYC the difference in price between an LCD or LED and a Plasma would be made up in 1 year of electrical costs if its on 4 hours a day.
Click to expand...

Please disregard glugglug's entire post. I don't think there's any truth whatsoever in it. I'm sure that most of the regulars on this forum know this, but I just wanted to point it out in case someone new comes in.
Click to expand...
The viewing angle stuff is wacky, but he's not lying at all about the power consumption issues. Plasmas suck down a lot of juice, and can REALLY heat up a room.
Click to expand...

My KRP-500 uses about 170 watts with power save on. Looking at the reviews for the new LED TVs I see the 46" uses 112 watts in power save mode. Considering it is smaller and lower power tech, that 170 is pretty damn good if you ask me. And all large TVs put off a lot of heat.
 
Originally posted by: Chris
Originally posted by: kalrith
PQ of plasma is BETTER than all other technologies.
Click to expand...

Plasma is only better than LCD. CRT and projectors outright rape plasma in PQ.
Click to expand...

OK, let me rephrase that, "Plasma is better than all other competing technologies." I'm pretty sure that would include rptv, LED, and LCD TV. You aren't going to buy a 60" CRT, and few people cross-shop projectors with TVs. I'm sure that some do, but most people who don't have an appropriate room for projection won't consider one, and most people who do have an appropriate room for projection won't consider a TV since they're "small."
 
Originally posted by: erwos
Originally posted by: kalrith
Originally posted by: glugglug
Plasma = suckage.

Picture quality is worse than any other technology, except for projection, and in many cases even projection is better.
Viewing angle = absolutely horrible. If your vertical viewing angle is 5 degrees from level half the screen will appear dark.
Power consumption is up to 3x more than a CRT the same size. I don't know what the electric rates are by you, but here in NYC the difference in price between an LCD or LED and a Plasma would be made up in 1 year of electrical costs if its on 4 hours a day.
Click to expand...

Please disregard glugglug's entire post. I don't think there's any truth whatsoever in it. I'm sure that most of the regulars on this forum know this, but I just wanted to point it out in case someone new comes in.
Click to expand...
The viewing angle stuff is wacky, but he's not lying at all about the power consumption issues. Plasmas suck down a lot of juice, and can REALLY heat up a room.
Click to expand...

So stating, "...here in NYC the difference in price between an LCD or LED and a Plasma would be made up in 1 year of electrical costs if its on 4 hours a day," is not a lie at all? At my electric costs, my power-hungry plasma (because it's 3 yrs old) would use $21 in electricity if it's on 4 hours a day. If an LCD uses half that, we're only talking $10.50 per YEAR. Even if I left my TV on 24/7 and an LCD uses half the electricity, then we're still talking about a $63 increase in the electric bill per year. I'm pretty sure that would make the previously quoted statement a lie.

I know that plasmas use more energy than LCDs, but people seem to use that as a huge reason to buy a plasma over an LCD, and I just don't think an energy savings of $10 (4 hours per day of usage) to $30 (12 hours per day of usage) per year makes enough of a difference to buy a TV with a worse PQ, especially if it costs hundreds of dollars more in the first place. It would be like spending the same money (or more money) on an inferior car instead of a superior car because you'll save $30 in gas per year, because the inferior car gets 31 mpg and the superior car only gets 30 mpg.
 
Originally posted by: kalrith
Originally posted by: erwos
Originally posted by: kalrith
Originally posted by: glugglug
Plasma = suckage.

Picture quality is worse than any other technology, except for projection, and in many cases even projection is better.
Viewing angle = absolutely horrible. If your vertical viewing angle is 5 degrees from level half the screen will appear dark.
Power consumption is up to 3x more than a CRT the same size. I don't know what the electric rates are by you, but here in NYC the difference in price between an LCD or LED and a Plasma would be made up in 1 year of electrical costs if its on 4 hours a day.
Click to expand...

Please disregard glugglug's entire post. I don't think there's any truth whatsoever in it. I'm sure that most of the regulars on this forum know this, but I just wanted to point it out in case someone new comes in.
Click to expand...
The viewing angle stuff is wacky, but he's not lying at all about the power consumption issues. Plasmas suck down a lot of juice, and can REALLY heat up a room.
Click to expand...

So stating, "...here in NYC the difference in price between an LCD or LED and a Plasma would be made up in 1 year of electrical costs if its on 4 hours a day," is not a lie at all? At my electric costs, my power-hungry plasma (because it's 3 yrs old) would use $21 in electricity if it's on 4 hours a day. If an LCD uses half that, we're only talking $10.50 per YEAR. Even if I left my TV on 24/7 and an LCD uses half the electricity, then we're still talking about a $63 increase in the electric bill per year. I'm pretty sure that would make the previously quoted statement a lie.

I know that plasmas use more energy than LCDs, but people seem to use that as a huge reason to buy a plasma over an LCD, and I just don't think an energy savings of $10 (4 hours per day of usage) to $30 (12 hours per day of usage) per year makes enough of a difference to buy a TV with a worse PQ, especially if it costs hundreds of dollars more in the first place. It would be like spending the same money (or more money) on an inferior car instead of a superior car because you'll save $30 in gas per year, because the inferior car gets 31 mpg and the superior car only gets 30 mpg.
Click to expand...

Don't bring logic into this!
 
Originally posted by: sdifox
Panasonic did pick up the technology from Pioneer so expect the Pannies to top Kuros soon.
Click to expand...

Where did you hear this?

@Chris how can a CRT compare with a Kuro for 1080p content?

plus, the Kuros have much better detail and black levels than most projectors
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top