- Sep 29, 2004
- 18,656
- 67
- 91
OK.... plasmas. I read up on the pros/cons and I think the LED thing is not something I am locked into anymore.
I'll consider plasmas.
I'll consider plasmas.
I did not say why, this is true. the answer is because I want ot use less electricity. Has nothing to do with economics. Just personal choice. I know a plasma might cost $30/year to power and a LED, $15.
The other thing is the room that this is going in has alot of widnows. Plasma have glossy screams and LEDs are matte.
I did not say why, this is true. the answer is because I want ot use less electricity. Has nothing to do with economics. Just personal choice. I know a plasma might cost $30/year to power and a LED, $15.
The other thing is the room that this is going in has alot of widnows. Plasma have glossy screams and LEDs are matte.
OK.... plasmas. I read up on the pros/cons and I think the LED thing is not something I am locked into anymore.
I'll consider plasmas.
Not all LED are matte and there are many LED based LCD screens that are as reflective as any Plasma. Sony had a few models that gave excellent quality but had poor reflective properties. Their newer sets especially the higher end, are better.
Look into the Panasonic VT60 then. Great picture quality and it doesn't introduce a terrible amount of input lag like the ST60. If gaming isn't a primary usage or a concern, the ST60 is also worth a look. It's also about the best value you will find for TV and movies.
What is all this about lag? Isn't that all resolved now with modern tech? Even my 7 year old plasma doesn't seem to "lag" at all.
I'll consider plasmas.
Why would the VT60 have less lag than the ST60? Aren't the electronics other than the screen itself the same?
YESSSS!!! You will actually get a good TV!! This thread is no longer depressing!!!
There ARE good LCD panels out there if you bother to look. No need to be elitist about Plasma which is a dead technology anyway.
There ARE good LCD panels out there if you bother to look. No need to be elitist about Plasma which is a dead technology anyway.
Yes they want it killed. Too much resources.
Plasma was the CRT solution. They R&D'd the shit out of it.
The jump to LCD/LED was easy.
There ARE good LCD panels out there if you bother to look. No need to be elitist about Plasma which is a dead technology anyway.
Not enough profit margin, and they don't do so well in showroom that are way brighter lit than any room you'll ever watch tv in.
Why setting for 'good' when you can have great or fantastic. Especially when it costs less.
Out of CNET's top 5 TVs for picture quality in 2013 it reads like:
1. Best Panny plasma
2. Second best Panny plasma
3. Best Samsung plasma
4. Third best Panny plasma (aka MID RANGE unit)
5. Sony's best LCD TV that doesn't have a 60 inch model
http://reviews.cnet.com/best-tvs-picture-quality/
So yes, if OP really wants the best 60 inch value you can buy in 2013 it will be a plasma. A midrange Panny beats the best LEDs out there for PQ.
The fact that they aren't being made anymore should be the thing to push OP to buy, as starting next year the AVS Forum will beech and beech about how "nothing out today matches that old 2013 Panny" for at least four years or however long it takes a 60+ inch sub $4k OLED to be released. Just like what happened with the Kuros.
I know I am glad I bought my 65 inch Panny before the great TV drought begins.....
So when it breaks you'll never watch TV again? In a few years people will forget Plasma even existed.
The move to 4k will be slow but Plasma won't bring us there. I own a Plasma but I'm not blind to the rest of the market either.
I think I am sold on the Panny VT60 or ST60. It will probably come down to whether or not I want to drop the extra $350 on the VT60. Reading on this more, seems like Plasmas are going by by soon and some suspect that TVs with such high quality output will not be around till OLEDs are cheap for joe average consumer.
for 350 get the VT.
There are other trade offs like heat generation, power savings, reflectiveness of the screen, input lag.
The point is, there are reasons someone would want a Plasma but it also isn't the end all be all. If it was, they would be moving to 4k with them.
4K lacks a killer app. No mainstream content delivery platform nor a powerful enough game console to really exploit the advantage.
When 4K is ready OLED will be ready.
Heat and power are minimal considerations. IE the price difference is something like 60 years of power savings. Reflectiveness is a per model issue. LCD's have some pretty glossy screens too. Aside from the st60 (for whatever reason) plasma actually has really good input lag.
Whatever reason they're not moving forward with plasma, its sure doesn't look like its a technical one.
4k is kinda a joke. You'll have to have a far larger screen than most people have room for to really take advantage of the resolution. We have a hard time delivering a quality signal even at 1080p. There is pretty much zero content for it. I totally agree that OLED or another tech will have stepped up by the time 4k is worthwhile. I expect the transition to be slower than HD. We don't have the digital broadcast transition to help push people along into ordering new TVs. There will always be the junkies who want it, but I think It'll be like laserdisc.
