Plasma vs LCD, whats best?

89911 · 06:17 AM

I own several HD TV's and just bought a 40" Sony Bravia LCD. The specs are 1080p 240hz refresh complete with motionflow technology. So I sit down last night to watch some Steeler preseason game and I am rather disturbed by the distortion of movement, say on a quick running play or long throw. To the point that it is distracting. My other HD sets are rear projections LCD's, one a Sony and the other a Toshiba that never seem to have those issues. I have every setting to counteract the distortion, but I am considering looking for an alternative, say plasma. The area it sits in is rather bright and open with a lot of sunshine which is why I stayed away from the plasma. I bought the TV at Sam's so its no problem taking it back. For the most part, the picture is stunning, just not on fast motion. Opinions? I should add that I will be using this as a large computer monitor also to skype and browse from my couch. I am not sure how plasmas work for this use.

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

LED is the new thing - they look awfully good to me. And I suspect the reliability and energy consumption are vastly superior to either, but I'm sure someone who's more into this stuff will chime in soon.

gr8fl4porsche · gr8fl4porsche's Garage

As a HD viewer for the last 4 years or so, I can say that most picture quality and motion blur issues are due to the source, not the TV. Just my observation.

I can tell when the broadcasters are using the good cameras and when the older extra cameras are in play. I can tell when a stadium has the latest and greatest digital setups and when they are in need of upgrade. Preseason brings out the average cameras loaded on the local trucks.

When the networks really care, superbowl for example, you can tell that they are using the latest and greatest. Beautiful picture quality and no blur.

Golf is another example. Absolutely stunning video quality during the majors and so-so quality on a typical Sunday afternoon with some blur present.

Some TV's deal better with average broadcasts and help mask the quality deficiencies while others let you see it as broadcasted. Motion blur always looks to me like the camera can't keep up with the movement because the replay, even slowed down a little, looks exactly the same.

Seems logical that if your TV suffered from motion blur it would do it all the time, I only see it occasionally.

Of course I could be wrong.

azasadny · azasadny's Garage

We bought our Dell 32" LCD tv about 5 years ago. It's a rebadged Phillips and we have been very happy with it. The trickiest thing is to try out the TV in a room, with similar lighting, to the room it will be used in, not the store's display room...

Scuba Steve · 08-22-2010, 07:25 AM

If your room is bright plasma is probably not feasible. The screen will reflect too much.

88-diamondblue · 08-22-2010, 07:44 AM

My son has a 58" Panasonic THX plasma that he bought because of what you are experiencing. He did a lot of research and went to look at many different units. He didn't like what the LCD sets did with fast motion.

I have an older plasma in a relatively bright room and don't have any more reflection on the screen than I did with the old 27" flat screen it replaced. Just more of it since the screen is a lot larger.

For myself I will replace the old plasma with a new larger one. IMHO the plasma has better picture quality. LCD or plasma really depends on what works best for your own situation.

89911 · 08-22-2010, 07:48 AM

Thanks and the source might be the issue. I think the broadcast was in 1080i. I haven't tried with a blue ray player and 1080p. Also for more computer geeks: whats the best settings to browse the computer from a tv viewing distance? Maybe its my aging eyes, but it seems like I need a 60" monitor to view a typical computer screen set at 1920 by1200. What have others done? lower resolution?

R K T · 08-22-2010, 08:32 AM

Last year I bought the 53" Samsung LCD with LED backlight. INCREDIBLE!
The absolute key to a good picture......Have it calibrated. After about 100 hrs of viewing have a tech come out and calibrate it. This isn't just simple adjustments. They hook up a laptop to the TV and it takes about an hour and it's almost like a different TV after.
Runs a couple hundred (from best buy)....worth every penny!

RWebb · RWebb's Garage

I have a plasma set - they do suck electrons. LED sets are tons better now, even the ones with fluorescent tube backlights. The LEDs act only as shutters for the backlights.

The hot ticket right now is, indeed, LCD with LED backlight. Again, LCDs are shutters. These are even higher picture quality, and even lower energy consumption.

Next up (not sure when) will be OLEDs (O=organic dyes). I think Sony has one out now or in "show it off" developmental stage. Here, the OLEDs are the lights (glowing pixels) and no shutter needed.

Craig 930 RS · 08-22-2010, 08:20 PM

Newer plasmas have nearly the same draw as LCD
Plasmas still consistently produce a better picture - Consumer Reports

Backlighting - or, more accurately, sidelighting - is somewhat of a farce

Then again, this is all somewhat splitting hairs as they are almost all pretty damn good.

red-beard · red-beard's Garage

I'm waiting for large OLED. I'll keep my plasma and CRT HDTVs until then.

EarlyPorsche · 08-22-2010, 08:42 PM

Plasma>LED>LCD.

That said the only thing that a Plasma has over an LED is refresh rate and the two are close enough where I would only purchase an LED.

LED is also substantially cooler and thinner than Plasma. LCD is what will be "low end" in short order. Plasma will still be the "high end" but fewer companies are making them because its expensive to make and markup is lower. Go with LED and you should be happy and not with a little hot plasma stove on your wall. My Plasma gets HOT!

porsche4life · porsche4life's Garage

I love the plasma but when I upgrade the TV in my apartment with a south facing window I will have to go with LCD... I simply can't budget LED....

EarlyPorsche · 08-22-2010, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porsche4life

I love the plasma but when I upgrade the TV in my apartment with a south facing window I will have to go with LCD... I simply can't budget LED....

If you can wait just a bit you will be able to swing it! Right now, at Costco, LED's are selling for around LCD prices. The difference between LCD and LED is actually substantial. Now Plasma v. LED and I would say buy what you like.

sammyg2 · 08-23-2010, 07:38 AM

When I bought my 52" plasma TV I shopped around allot, checking out many pictures in many showrooms.
I picked the samsung plasma because it looked so much letter than the others IMO.
I haven't experienced the motion problems you describe. Maybe it isn't a problem with my TV, maybe I'm not paying enough attention

But I can say one thing for sure, I do not like that my plasma gets very warm.

The room it's in is always a degree or two warmer than the rest of the house when the big TV is on for an extended period of time.
Wasn't like that before.
If I had to do it over again I'm not sure if I'd still get a plasma or not
I love the picture, I don't like the heat it gives off.

89911 · 08-23-2010, 08:27 AM

I do think LED are cooler then LCD's in some ways, but from what I read, they offer no real picture advantage over LCD's. They are thinner, may use slightly less energy, and definetly have a wow factor in how they look. I pulled this from CNET:

Energy efficiency: An LED TV consumes the least power among all HDTVs with a substantial energy savings of up to 40 percent compared with a conventional lamp-based LCD model. The other major benefits of using light-emitting diodes include an extended panel lifespan, low heat emission and better eco-friendliness. The latter is due to the mercury-free design of these energy-efficient bulbs.

Ultraslim design: Another advantage of edge lighting is that it frees up space behind the screen, which significally reduces bezel depth, giving rise to a family of ultraslim panels measuring as thin as 29.1mm in width. Putting aside the "wow" factor, these lightweight displays are much easier to install. Some can even be suspended on a special steel wire wall-mounting kit, just like a photo frame

island911 · 08-23-2010, 09:20 AM

Sony does an outstanding job of handeling motion.

I'm stunned that you think that 240hz Sony motionflow is inferiour to a plasma, of all things. --I have yet to see a plasma TV that I don't see the refresh flicker. (even the ones which claim high refresh rates)

89911 · 08-23-2010, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by island911

Sony does an outstanding job of handeling motion.

I'm stunned that you think that 240hz Sony motionflow is inferiour to a plasma, of all things. --I have yet to see a plasma TV that I don't see the refresh flicker. (even the ones which claim high refresh rates)

The reason I bought the Sony was for the 240hz. I am not saying it is inferior. I was watching an NFL HD game last night and didn't see the same blurring at High speeds. I am thinking it is more the source. I am keeping the TV also. Not enough to sway me to Plasma.

Craig 930 RS · 08-23-2010, 10:59 AM

Samsung plasma, 100%. I bought Samsung (the 63 incher) because it cleaned up over the other in Consumer Reports tests. It's a stunner!

It is also 140 lbs ;-)

RWebb · RWebb's Garage

like sammy & Craig, I also have a Samsung plasma - the heat is an asset in the middle of an Orygun winter, and it was the cheapest good set I could find.

but, I bought mine ~2 years ago -- not sure what one should get right now. Most likely a LCD with LED illumination, as per my post above.