Panny Plasma TV
02-09-2007, 03:53 PM
#1
Because Of You
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Panny Plasma TV
I am watching the commercial. Everybody is pushing LCD tv except Panasonic. Panasonic is pushing Plasma TV.
Is there a reason for that?
Are they trying to unload all their existing Plasma inventory before they begins to push LCD?
Is there a reason for that?
Are they trying to unload all their existing Plasma inventory before they begins to push LCD?
02-09-2007, 04:37 PM
#5
Because Of You
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wiki says Panasonic bought the company who invented the Plasma panel. Maybe that's why Panny is pushing Plasma.
ask the same question differently:
Why do the other companies not to push Plasma TV?
It seems to me that Plasma is a better technology for TV. It uses the same technology from CRT basically. I personally don't like LCD TV.
ask the same question differently:
Why do the other companies not to push Plasma TV?
It seems to me that Plasma is a better technology for TV. It uses the same technology from CRT basically. I personally don't like LCD TV.
02-09-2007, 04:58 PM
#6
The Creator
There's already a Plasma vs LCD debate/information thread active in this forum. So let's not get into it here.
But, to answer your question as to why Plasma has fallen out of favor recently...
1. Plasmas are more expensive to manufacture.
2. Few brands have the ability to manufacture their own Plasmas.
2. Full resolution (1080p) Plasmas are, by-and-large, prohibitively expensive.
3. Plasmas weigh significantly more than LCD.
4. Plasmas consume alot more power than LCD.
5. Plasmas are susceptible to burn-in.
6. Plasmas make more "noise" then LCD.
Note: there are "pros" to Plasma, but these are the "cons" that have caused Plasma to fall out of favor recently. This could possibly change in the next year or two as new Plasma technologies were recently introduced to address some of these issues.
But, to answer your question as to why Plasma has fallen out of favor recently...
1. Plasmas are more expensive to manufacture.
2. Few brands have the ability to manufacture their own Plasmas.
2. Full resolution (1080p) Plasmas are, by-and-large, prohibitively expensive.
3. Plasmas weigh significantly more than LCD.
4. Plasmas consume alot more power than LCD.
5. Plasmas are susceptible to burn-in.
6. Plasmas make more "noise" then LCD.
Note: there are "pros" to Plasma, but these are the "cons" that have caused Plasma to fall out of favor recently. This could possibly change in the next year or two as new Plasma technologies were recently introduced to address some of these issues.
02-09-2007, 06:50 PM
#7
Because Of You
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well... that does not explain why companies do not push Plasma TV. They don't have much ads for Plasma TV; but LCD TV ads are all over the place. I am wondering why that is.
Trending Topics
02-09-2007, 08:22 PM
#8
Aaaarrrggghhhh!
Originally Posted by soopa
There's already a Plasma vs LCD debate/information thread active in this forum. So let's not get into it here.
But, to answer your question as to why Plasma has fallen out of favor recently...
1. Plasmas are more expensive to manufacture.
2. Few brands have the ability to manufacture their own Plasmas.
2. Full resolution (1080p) Plasmas are, by-and-large, prohibitively expensive.
3. Plasmas weigh significantly more than LCD.
4. Plasmas consume alot more power than LCD.
5. Plasmas are susceptible to burn-in.
6. Plasmas make more "noise" then LCD.
Note: there are "pros" to Plasma, but these are the "cons" that have caused Plasma to fall out of favor recently. This could possibly change in the next year or two as new Plasma technologies were recently introduced to address some of these issues.
But, to answer your question as to why Plasma has fallen out of favor recently...
1. Plasmas are more expensive to manufacture.
2. Few brands have the ability to manufacture their own Plasmas.
2. Full resolution (1080p) Plasmas are, by-and-large, prohibitively expensive.
3. Plasmas weigh significantly more than LCD.
4. Plasmas consume alot more power than LCD.
5. Plasmas are susceptible to burn-in.
6. Plasmas make more "noise" then LCD.
Note: there are "pros" to Plasma, but these are the "cons" that have caused Plasma to fall out of favor recently. This could possibly change in the next year or two as new Plasma technologies were recently introduced to address some of these issues.
Another old "con" to plasma's was the heat they generated in older generations. Many owners bitched about how their plasma ran hot enough to heat the room.
The current tier 1 players have designed new models (I think we're in gen 9 now) to run much much cooler. Mine never gets any hotter when on compared to off, it makes absolutely no noise at all (just muted to make sure I wasn't spewing out BS, and from what I've read, the burn-in issues have been solved with the newer models marketed as 60k hour units.
Just my
02-09-2007, 09:24 PM
#9
The Creator
Originally Posted by bz268
Well... that does not explain why companies do not push Plasma TV. They don't have much ads for Plasma TV; but LCD TV ads are all over the place. I am wondering why that is.
They make more money per unit on LCD sales and consumer demand for LCD is stronger right now. It sound's like a no brainer from a business stand point to go where the profit margins are
02-09-2007, 09:39 PM
#10
The Creator
Originally Posted by Scribesoft
I completely agree with the first 4 items. The last 2 (#'s 5 and 6) were issues in prior generations of plasma's and they still get a bad rep for it. The latest gen of plasmas have basically overcome the traditional "burn-in" issues as well as the noise issues.
Another old "con" to plasma's was the heat they generated in older generations. Many owners bitched about how their plasma ran hot enough to heat the room.
The current tier 1 players have designed new models (I think we're in gen 9 now) to run much much cooler. Mine never gets any hotter when on compared to off, it makes absolutely no noise at all (just muted to make sure I wasn't spewing out BS, and from what I've read, the burn-in issues have been solved with the newer models marketed as 60k hour units.
Just my
Another old "con" to plasma's was the heat they generated in older generations. Many owners bitched about how their plasma ran hot enough to heat the room.
The current tier 1 players have designed new models (I think we're in gen 9 now) to run much much cooler. Mine never gets any hotter when on compared to off, it makes absolutely no noise at all (just muted to make sure I wasn't spewing out BS, and from what I've read, the burn-in issues have been solved with the newer models marketed as 60k hour units.
Just my
If you were to accidentally leave your well used display tuned to a high-contrast static screen (like your cable guide) over night (which i have done) it's more then likely you will suffer luminosity loss to a great enough degree to be detected, and over time it will only get worse.
Plasmas are still more susceptible to burn-in then most any other type of phosphor based display. Even if they implement ZeroBurn technology (which very few consumer displays do) they are still susceptible. 60,000 hour displays, as you mention, can lose enough luminosity after only 900 hours of NORMAL USE to make burn-in not only possible but likely. There's no questioning it as it's simply the fact of the matter.
As for the heat/noise issue. I guess we have to take your word for it. But I have to admit I pretty much wrote you off when you said "mine never gets any hotter when on compared to off" and "it makes absolutely no noise at all". I don't think there's a single display technology on the planet that doesn't generate SOME heat and make SOME noise. Ignoring the display itself, the processors in modern displays alone generate several degrees of heat. Sorry, I smell BiaS.
02-09-2007, 09:58 PM
#11
Aaaarrrggghhhh!
Originally Posted by soopa
As for the heat/noise issue. I guess we have to take your word for it. But I have to admit I pretty much wrote you off when you said "mine never gets any hotter when on compared to off" and "it makes absolutely no noise at all". I don't think there's a single display technology on the planet that doesn't generate SOME heat and make SOME noise. Ignoring the display itself, the processors in modern displays alone generate several degrees of heat. Sorry, I smell BiaS.
I also muted it and the only noise I can hear in the room is a very slight hum from my receiver and my dog breathing heavily as she dreams. No noise at all from the tv. No TV hum, no fan noise, no nothing. Maybe I'm deaf, but why can I hear the receiver hum?
You can smell all the BS you want, but I know what I felt and heard.
And it's not bias either.. I'm a huge fan of LCD's and will more than likely be using them in the rest of the home as we replace tour older CRT's. I could care less about justifying the plasma vs. lcd vs. dlp vs. whatever. For this specific application on our home, the plasma was simply the best choice at the time for our needs. If I could have bought an equivalent sized/quality/priced LCD at the time, I could just as easily have an LCD on the wall.
Last edited by Scribesoft; 02-09-2007 at 10:01 PM.
02-10-2007, 06:11 AM
#12
Everyday Joe
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Hampton Roads, VA (Smithfield)
Age: 49
Posts: 888
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^^^ Agreed. I have a 6 series Panny plasma (over 2.5 years old now) and that thing can run for 16 hrs straight and not get hot to the touch, nor do you hear it in a quiet room.
It has been a wonderful set and it gives my JVC 61 inch LCoS 1080p set a run for it's money. People always disagree over which set shows a "better" picture and usually fall on the side of "they're both fantastic".
Just my 2 cents....
It has been a wonderful set and it gives my JVC 61 inch LCoS 1080p set a run for it's money. People always disagree over which set shows a "better" picture and usually fall on the side of "they're both fantastic".
Just my 2 cents....
02-10-2007, 08:06 AM
#13
Team Owner
I'd say that my plasma throws a little more heat out the back than a tube TV. The only reason it may feel hotter is that there is less physical area for the heat to dissipate. I will agree that its a known fact that plasma displays are power hungry beasts and that LCD monitors use less energy and produce less heat.
The burn-in is far less an issue than the past but its still there. It took 6 hours on a white screen for me to get rid of the Noggin logo on my screen. I would love to run all of my 4:3 content in non stretch mode but I fear uneven phosphor use. The 4:3 burn-in seems to still be an issue.
My panel also made a buzzing sound when it was new but that has gone away.
Is motion blur on LCD screens still an issue for fast action films and sports? That and the price of LCD at my time of purchase were the two main reasons I didn't go with LCD. The blur would make me crazy, my plasma does not have any blur at all.
The burn-in is far less an issue than the past but its still there. It took 6 hours on a white screen for me to get rid of the Noggin logo on my screen. I would love to run all of my 4:3 content in non stretch mode but I fear uneven phosphor use. The 4:3 burn-in seems to still be an issue.
My panel also made a buzzing sound when it was new but that has gone away.
Is motion blur on LCD screens still an issue for fast action films and sports? That and the price of LCD at my time of purchase were the two main reasons I didn't go with LCD. The blur would make me crazy, my plasma does not have any blur at all.
02-10-2007, 08:32 AM
#14
Benchwarmer
The only true 0 response time is DLP. It is a direct projection of light on the screen. LCD and plasma both use a medium that must be excited (or unexcited) to work. It's my understanding that it also produces a nice contrast ratio, but I've never experienced other models long enough to notice a difference.
02-10-2007, 12:34 PM
#15
Because Of You
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
The only true 0 response time is DLP. It is a direct projection of light on the screen. LCD and plasma both use a medium that must be excited (or unexcited) to work. It's my understanding that it also produces a nice contrast ratio, but I've never experienced other models long enough to notice a difference.
But then again, no one is pushing DLP but TI either. Sony pushed their 3-LCD projector for a while but not anymore. JVC hyped about their Organic-Silicone LCD for a while but it was RIP again.
02-10-2007, 12:56 PM
#16
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by doopstr
I'd say that my plasma throws a little more heat out the back than a tube TV. The only reason it may feel hotter is that there is less physical area for the heat to dissipate. I will agree that its a known fact that plasma displays are power hungry beasts and that LCD monitors use less energy and produce less heat.
The burn-in is far less an issue than the past but its still there. It took 6 hours on a white screen for me to get rid of the Noggin logo on my screen. I would love to run all of my 4:3 content in non stretch mode but I fear uneven phosphor use. The 4:3 burn-in seems to still be an issue.
My panel also made a buzzing sound when it was new but that has gone away.
Is motion blur on LCD screens still an issue for fast action films and sports? That and the price of LCD at my time of purchase were the two main reasons I didn't go with LCD. The blur would make me crazy, my plasma does not have any blur at all.
The burn-in is far less an issue than the past but its still there. It took 6 hours on a white screen for me to get rid of the Noggin logo on my screen. I would love to run all of my 4:3 content in non stretch mode but I fear uneven phosphor use. The 4:3 burn-in seems to still be an issue.
My panel also made a buzzing sound when it was new but that has gone away.
Is motion blur on LCD screens still an issue for fast action films and sports? That and the price of LCD at my time of purchase were the two main reasons I didn't go with LCD. The blur would make me crazy, my plasma does not have any blur at all.
Always watch your 4:3 with grey bars, not black bars. Unless you are watching a really dark movie, the grey bars will likely age the phosphers at a rate closer to the middle.
That said, it takes ALOT to burn in a newer gen plasma with 60,000 hour half life, especially after break-in. The phosphors ago so slowly, that you would probably need hundreds of hours in a row on static contact to permanently burn something in.
02-10-2007, 01:32 PM
#17
The Creator
Originally Posted by doopstr
I'd say that my plasma throws a little more heat out the back than a tube TV. The only reason it may feel hotter is that there is less physical area for the heat to dissipate. I will agree that its a known fact that plasma displays are power hungry beasts and that LCD monitors use less energy and produce less heat.
The burn-in is far less an issue than the past but its still there. It took 6 hours on a white screen for me to get rid of the Noggin logo on my screen. I would love to run all of my 4:3 content in non stretch mode but I fear uneven phosphor use. The 4:3 burn-in seems to still be an issue.
My panel also made a buzzing sound when it was new but that has gone away.
Is motion blur on LCD screens still an issue for fast action films and sports? That and the price of LCD at my time of purchase were the two main reasons I didn't go with LCD. The blur would make me crazy, my plasma does not have any blur at all.
The burn-in is far less an issue than the past but its still there. It took 6 hours on a white screen for me to get rid of the Noggin logo on my screen. I would love to run all of my 4:3 content in non stretch mode but I fear uneven phosphor use. The 4:3 burn-in seems to still be an issue.
My panel also made a buzzing sound when it was new but that has gone away.
Is motion blur on LCD screens still an issue for fast action films and sports? That and the price of LCD at my time of purchase were the two main reasons I didn't go with LCD. The blur would make me crazy, my plasma does not have any blur at all.
I own a Plasma and an LCD.
The Plasma generates more heat. It has nothing to do with "hot to the touch". The screen is not where the heat is generated.
ALL ELECTRONIC DEVICES GENERATE HEAT. If you say your Plasma does not generate heat, you're simply lying or clueless. I'm sorry, it's just the way it is.
As for noise, Plasmas have fans to disipate heat. Even the new ones.
Those fans generate noise. It may not be a ton, but they make noise. Most Plasma reviews I've seen of late put them in the 15-25 decible range.
Anyway, to answer you, yes. LCD's still have some motion blur, although response times of the current generation are extremely fast (especially in sports or gaming modes).
That said, I don't find the motion blur of LCD to be any different or more distracting then the ghosting and image retention of my plasma.
Like IlliNorge pointed out, other then DLP, you're not going to find a display without any sort of fast action problems.
02-10-2007, 01:33 PM
#18
The Creator
Originally Posted by bz268
But then again, no one is pushing DLP but TI either. Sony pushed their 3-LCD projector for a while but not anymore. JVC hyped about their Organic-Silicone LCD for a while but it was RIP again.
I think thats a highly subjective comment.
I see boatloads of advertising for DLP. It's the bread-and-butter for most of the TV manufacturers out there right now. DLP is today's leading display technology (sales wise).
02-10-2007, 01:35 PM
#19
The Creator
Originally Posted by fdl
Always watch your 4:3 with grey bars, not black bars. Unless you are watching a really dark movie, the grey bars will likely age the phosphers at a rate closer to the middle.
That said, it takes ALOT to burn in a newer gen plasma with 60,000 hour half life, especially after break-in. The phosphors ago so slowly, that you would probably need hundreds of hours in a row on static contact to permanently burn something in.
That said, it takes ALOT to burn in a newer gen plasma with 60,000 hour half life, especially after break-in. The phosphors ago so slowly, that you would probably need hundreds of hours in a row on static contact to permanently burn something in.
02-10-2007, 01:55 PM
#20
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by soopa
I love when people say "burn-in isn't an issue" and then "watch TV with grey bars" in the same sentence.
02-11-2007, 08:52 AM
#21
Team Owner
Originally Posted by soopa
I love when people say "burn-in isn't an issue" and then "watch TV with grey bars" in the same sentence.
I'll believe that burn-in isn't an issue when they lock up the "master burn-in" thread over at AVS.
02-12-2007, 10:59 AM
#22
Originally Posted by bz268
But then again, no one is pushing DLP but TI either. Sony pushed their 3-LCD projector for a while but not anymore. JVC hyped about their Organic-Silicone LCD for a while but it was RIP again.
Originally Posted by soopa
Huh? What world are you living in?
I think thats a highly subjective comment.
I see boatloads of advertising for DLP. It's the bread-and-butter for most of the TV manufacturers out there right now. DLP is today's leading display technology (sales wise).
I think thats a highly subjective comment.
I see boatloads of advertising for DLP. It's the bread-and-butter for most of the TV manufacturers out there right now. DLP is today's leading display technology (sales wise).
I probably see more advertising for DLP's then any other technology out there. Especially when watching sports. It seems like every commercial break I see that little girl with the mirror box in her hand talking about the mirrors of DLP. Some version of that commercial is constantly on.
02-12-2007, 11:24 AM
#23
Originally Posted by soopa
Thanks for a realistic and un-biased review.
I own a Plasma and an LCD.
The Plasma generates more heat. It has nothing to do with "hot to the touch". The screen is not where the heat is generated.
ALL ELECTRONIC DEVICES GENERATE HEAT. If you say your Plasma does not generate heat, you're simply lying or clueless. I'm sorry, it's just the way it is.
As for noise, Plasmas have fans to dissipate heat. Even the new ones.
I own a Plasma and an LCD.
The Plasma generates more heat. It has nothing to do with "hot to the touch". The screen is not where the heat is generated.
ALL ELECTRONIC DEVICES GENERATE HEAT. If you say your Plasma does not generate heat, you're simply lying or clueless. I'm sorry, it's just the way it is.
As for noise, Plasmas have fans to dissipate heat. Even the new ones.
02-12-2007, 12:31 PM
#24
Because Of You
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by juniorbean
...I see that little girl with the mirror box in her hand talking about the mirrors of DLP. Some version of that commercial is constantly on.
That is the commercial from TI. AND! They are not selling the TV. They are advertising the DLP chip. You don't see Sony or the other companies having their commercial to sell DLP TV or Plasma.
Same thing with Plasma. The only commercial is from Panasonic and Hitachi only.
Hmmm... the DLP commercial is cleanly not for consumers. It is a advertising to the other companies. I think.
02-12-2007, 12:55 PM
#25
^ 
Didn't see that you specified TI in your original reply.
But yes, that is how they sell DLP. The individual manufacturers do not need to push their own sets as heavily since TI is very heavily marketing the technology. And yes, that commercial is completely aimed at consumers and educating them on DLP technology. All one needs to do is visit the website they advertise in that commercial (www.itsthemirrors.com/) to see that the consumer is their aim.
As for plasma... you're talking about the two heaviest hitters in the plasma industry, so that is why you see their commercials. I have also seen tons of commercials for Oleva, Vizio, and even some for Samsung plasmas. So there are other plenty of other plasma commercials out there...
Sony has advertised plasma as well as their Bravia LCD line. They wouldn't advertise DLP b/c they do not make one.
I have also seen commercials for Toshiba and Sammy DLPs.
Didn't see that you specified TI in your original reply. But yes, that is how they sell DLP. The individual manufacturers do not need to push their own sets as heavily since TI is very heavily marketing the technology. And yes, that commercial is completely aimed at consumers and educating them on DLP technology. All one needs to do is visit the website they advertise in that commercial (www.itsthemirrors.com/) to see that the consumer is their aim.
As for plasma... you're talking about the two heaviest hitters in the plasma industry, so that is why you see their commercials. I have also seen tons of commercials for Oleva, Vizio, and even some for Samsung plasmas. So there are other plenty of other plasma commercials out there...
Sony has advertised plasma as well as their Bravia LCD line. They wouldn't advertise DLP b/c they do not make one.
I have also seen commercials for Toshiba and Sammy DLPs.
02-12-2007, 01:11 PM
#26
Have camera, will travel
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Federal Way, WA
Age: 63
Posts: 7,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by soopa
There's already a Plasma vs LCD debate/information thread active in this forum. So let's not get into it here.
But, to answer your question as to why Plasma has fallen out of favor recently...
1. Plasmas are more expensive to manufacture.
2. Few brands have the ability to manufacture their own Plasmas.
2. Full resolution (1080p) Plasmas are, by-and-large, prohibitively expensive.
3. Plasmas weigh significantly more than LCD.
4. Plasmas consume alot more power than LCD.
5. Plasmas are susceptible to burn-in.
6. Plasmas make more "noise" then LCD.
Note: there are "pros" to Plasma, but these are the "cons" that have caused Plasma to fall out of favor recently. This could possibly change in the next year or two as new Plasma technologies were recently introduced to address some of these issues.
But, to answer your question as to why Plasma has fallen out of favor recently...
1. Plasmas are more expensive to manufacture.
2. Few brands have the ability to manufacture their own Plasmas.
2. Full resolution (1080p) Plasmas are, by-and-large, prohibitively expensive.
3. Plasmas weigh significantly more than LCD.
4. Plasmas consume alot more power than LCD.
5. Plasmas are susceptible to burn-in.
6. Plasmas make more "noise" then LCD.
Note: there are "pros" to Plasma, but these are the "cons" that have caused Plasma to fall out of favor recently. This could possibly change in the next year or two as new Plasma technologies were recently introduced to address some of these issues.
http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/
02-12-2007, 01:17 PM
#27
^ Well, that's a website designed by plasma people to push plasmas and is sponsored by companies and sites that sell plasmas. I would take that with a grain of salt.
As was said earlier... there is a HUGE master burn-in topic over on the AVS forums which proves burn in... while no longer the large concern it once was, is still an issue.
As was said earlier... there is a HUGE master burn-in topic over on the AVS forums which proves burn in... while no longer the large concern it once was, is still an issue.
02-12-2007, 01:24 PM
#28
Have camera, will travel
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Federal Way, WA
Age: 63
Posts: 7,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^Fair enough. I'm just starting to research this purchase. Which would you go with right now, LCD or plasma? I have to say, the plasmas I saw had incredible picture quality, without viewing angle problems. The LCD's were good too, but the viewing angle drives me nuts.
02-12-2007, 02:59 PM
#29
^ I am a huge fan of DLP only b/c you can get much more screen and 1080p for much cheaper then a comparable LCD or plasma.
However, if your application works best with either a LCD or plasma, I would probably go plasma. Now, that's only my opinion, and if you look around this section, you will see that I am not a huge fan of LCD... so take that for what it is worth.
The Sony Bravia LCD's an the Samsung LCD's are probably the only LCD brands I would consider. Both get great reviews and are very well liked. But yes, I agree with you regarding viewing angle... and if that is a concern, then I'd suggest plasma.
However, if your application works best with either a LCD or plasma, I would probably go plasma. Now, that's only my opinion, and if you look around this section, you will see that I am not a huge fan of LCD... so take that for what it is worth.
The Sony Bravia LCD's an the Samsung LCD's are probably the only LCD brands I would consider. Both get great reviews and are very well liked. But yes, I agree with you regarding viewing angle... and if that is a concern, then I'd suggest plasma.
02-12-2007, 03:14 PM
#31
The Creator
Personally I wouldn't by a TV today.
There's a ton of new products coming out this summer.
1. LED-backed 120hz LCD's will be in abudance with contrast ratios hundreds of times greater then what is available now and ability to reproduce 24fps (Blu-ray/HD-DVD) content without 3:2 pulldown.
2. Ultra-slim DLP's with decent viewing angles are on their way, making them wall mountable.
3. Plasma's are receiving a host of upgrades and new features, including completely wireless Plasmas from Samsung, and new "completely re-engineered" plasma technology from Pioneer that is supposed to be the end all be all of current display technologies.
4. Last but not least, OLED is finally hitting the market this year. Granted, this is only applicable to you if you're buying in the sub-40" range. But still, it's one more thing that would make me stay away from buying a new TV today.
Wait until Spring, wait until all the manufacturers release defininitive launch dates and specs for their new TV's. This year we'll see the biggest advances in display tech in some time.
There's a ton of new products coming out this summer.
1. LED-backed 120hz LCD's will be in abudance with contrast ratios hundreds of times greater then what is available now and ability to reproduce 24fps (Blu-ray/HD-DVD) content without 3:2 pulldown.
2. Ultra-slim DLP's with decent viewing angles are on their way, making them wall mountable.
3. Plasma's are receiving a host of upgrades and new features, including completely wireless Plasmas from Samsung, and new "completely re-engineered" plasma technology from Pioneer that is supposed to be the end all be all of current display technologies.
4. Last but not least, OLED is finally hitting the market this year. Granted, this is only applicable to you if you're buying in the sub-40" range. But still, it's one more thing that would make me stay away from buying a new TV today.
Wait until Spring, wait until all the manufacturers release defininitive launch dates and specs for their new TV's. This year we'll see the biggest advances in display tech in some time.
02-12-2007, 03:16 PM
#32
The Creator
Originally Posted by juniorbean
The Sony Bravia LCD's an the Samsung LCD's are probably the only LCD brands I would consider. Both get great reviews and are very well liked. But yes, I agree with you regarding viewing angle... and if that is a concern, then I'd suggest plasma.
The vertical viewing angle is somewhat less then Plasma, but they're still far superior to DLP in viewing angle.
02-12-2007, 03:27 PM
#33
^ DLP will have the worst viewing angle of the 3... but he really didn't mention DLP, so I didn't got too far with it either other then just mentioning my preference.
Agreed. Tons of great stuff on the horizon...
DLP will have the worst viewing angle of the 3... but he really didn't mention DLP, so I didn't got too far with it either other then just mentioning my preference.
Originally Posted by soopa
Personally I wouldn't by a TV today.
There's a ton of new products coming out this summer.
1. LED-backed 120hz LCD's will be in abudance with contrast ratios hundreds of times greater then what is available now and ability to reproduce 24fps (Blu-ray/HD-DVD) content without 3:2 pulldown.
2. Ultra-slim DLP's with decent viewing angles are on their way, making them wall mountable.
3. Plasma's are receiving a host of upgrades and new features, including completely wireless Plasmas from Samsung, and new "completely re-engineered" plasma technology from Pioneer that is supposed to be the end all be all of current display technologies.
4. Last but not least, OLED is finally hitting the market this year. Granted, this is only applicable to you if you're buying in the sub-40" range. But still, it's one more thing that would make me stay away from buying a new TV today.
Wait until Spring, wait until all the manufacturers release defininitive launch dates and specs for their new TV's. This year we'll see the biggest advances in display tech in some time.
There's a ton of new products coming out this summer.
1. LED-backed 120hz LCD's will be in abudance with contrast ratios hundreds of times greater then what is available now and ability to reproduce 24fps (Blu-ray/HD-DVD) content without 3:2 pulldown.
2. Ultra-slim DLP's with decent viewing angles are on their way, making them wall mountable.
3. Plasma's are receiving a host of upgrades and new features, including completely wireless Plasmas from Samsung, and new "completely re-engineered" plasma technology from Pioneer that is supposed to be the end all be all of current display technologies.
4. Last but not least, OLED is finally hitting the market this year. Granted, this is only applicable to you if you're buying in the sub-40" range. But still, it's one more thing that would make me stay away from buying a new TV today.
Wait until Spring, wait until all the manufacturers release defininitive launch dates and specs for their new TV's. This year we'll see the biggest advances in display tech in some time.
Agreed. Tons of great stuff on the horizon...
02-13-2007, 08:51 PM
#34
Team Owner
Originally Posted by soopa
3. Plasma's are receiving a host of upgrades and new features, including completely wireless Plasmas from Samsung...
Got details on that, how does it get power?
02-13-2007, 09:15 PM
#35
The Creator
Originally Posted by doopstr
Got details on that, how does it get power?
it still has a power cord i presume. it'll use 802.11n as it's transmission medium for everything else.
02-13-2007, 09:43 PM
#36
Suzuka Master
I also am a fan of plasma for picture quality. I was never a big fan of LCD's until the latest Sony Bravia's started hitting the market. There is a new set on the market that I would like to mention. I am not sure of the model number though unfortunatey. It is a Mitsubishi LCD though, and the image quality was outstanding, the feature set was very good, and even the viewing angle was not an issue. The particular customer who I installed this tv for was concerned about the angle because her kids sit at the counter in the kitchen and often watch tv, and it is somewhat of an extreme angle. I was standing almost completely beside the tv, and I could make out the picture perfectly. So I will say I was impressed.
02-14-2007, 11:15 AM
#38
Rebourne
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Age: 42
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^ Thats a great price. I too considered LCD, but chose Plasma because of the price difference. I bought a 42" Hitachi Ultravison Plasma. It has great picture quality and was rated very well by cnet.com
I had Circuit City price match an online store. I recommend any of you to have Circuit City and Best Buy to price match an online store, it worked for me!
As for LDC, I will be getting one in a year or so when prices drop.
I had Circuit City price match an online store. I recommend any of you to have Circuit City and Best Buy to price match an online store, it worked for me!
As for LDC, I will be getting one in a year or so when prices drop.
02-14-2007, 11:35 AM
#39
Originally Posted by llJrockll
^^ Thats a great price. I too considered LCD, but chose Plasma because of the price difference. I bought a 42" Hitachi Ultravison Plasma. It has great picture quality and was rated very well by cnet.com
I had Circuit City price match an online store. I recommend any of you to have Circuit City and Best Buy to price match an online store, it worked for me!
I had Circuit City price match an online store. I recommend any of you to have Circuit City and Best Buy to price match an online store, it worked for me!
My local Best Buy will work with me... but that's only recent and b/c of how much we have spent there in the past... but other then that, just walking into a BB or CC.... that normally doesn't happen. So your experience is very unique.
02-14-2007, 04:31 PM
#40
Rebourne
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Age: 42
Posts: 868
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by juniorbean
Well, consider yourself lucky then... b/c I've never found a Circuit City of Best Buy that will match an online ad. I've also checked a bunch in several states, and none will match an online retailer's price.
My local Best Buy will work with me... but that's only recent and b/c of how much we have spent there in the past... but other then that, just walking into a BB or CC.... that normally doesn't happen. So your experience is very unique.
My local Best Buy will work with me... but that's only recent and b/c of how much we have spent there in the past... but other then that, just walking into a BB or CC.... that normally doesn't happen. So your experience is very unique.
Yeah....I know. I walked in to CC the week of the Florida/Ohio game since they had specials on their ads, but I took in the printed information from Cnet.com with other competitive prices.
The T.V. is retailed for 1500-1600 at BB &CC and they matched it to $1250 as well with a new credit line with no interes 0% for 48 months.... It tokk them a while to get it approved by the manager, but in the end they gave it to me