Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

LCD or Plasma

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
August 1, 2012 11:02:59 AM

Going to buy a 42" TV(approx) but not sure which is better, the plasma or the LCD… also a decent brand

More about : lcd plasma

a b x TV
August 1, 2012 5:33:41 PM

http://www.hometheater.com/content/how-choose-flat-pane...

LCD, and Plasma each have unique benefits, advantages, and weaknesses.

Generally LCD is better suited for a bright room. They are often the choice for gamers, or people who use them as computer monitors. LED backlit LCDs have very vibrant color, and bright images. LCD relies on a refresh rate to reduce image blur/smear. They are much better than the past, but a keen eye can still pick up on this.

Plasma is regarded as the technology for movie buffs. They are capable of better shadow detail, and accuracy than most LCD sets. The gap is closer than it has ever been, but Plasma still edges out all but the very top of the line LED local dimming sets. Plasma sets have a glass front, so daytime viewing in a bright room can be a challenge. Extremely fast motion is better on a plasma as well, as they do not rely on the same refresh rate as LCD.

Honestly, the best thing to do is take a read of the article I linked, and go look for yourself. Most people will prefer one over the other, but there is no right answer. I personally own two Plasmas, and an LCD. I much prefer watching movies on my plasma sets, but like the LCD for daytime viewing, because I can see it in my brightly lit living room. One thing to remember, manufacturers love to turn their sets on "Nuclear hotter than the sun mode" in the showroom. This grabs your attention in the store. LCD will almost always win the brighness battles. Make sure to evaluate your choices with different content, on normal baseline settings, and if posisble, different lighting situations.

Edit: Forgot your brand inquiry.

For LCD, I feel LG is a very good value price/performance, but if you're willing to spend more money, you start hitting Sony's HX/XBR line, or samsung's 6000+ series, they really start to pull ahead of LG in terms of image quality. For Plasma, Panasonic all around would be my first choice, which is good, because they're the only manufacturer currently building 42" sets.
m
0
l
August 1, 2012 6:37:17 PM

I owned two Panasonic Viera 46" plasma's...and both scored exceptionally well on Consumer Reports tests. Sadly, my boys broke the one in the bonus room (my oldest boy thought he was General Grievous and the other boy thought he was Obi-Wan- they hit the screen with their 'lightsabers').

I did some research and came across the LG 50PZ550. It has a very full feature-set, even more than the Panasonic it was replacing. Unfortunately, since it was a close-out, I had difficulty in tracking one down. I finally found one that was being used as floor model. Fortunately, since it was a close-out, I got it for a song!

Anyhow, for me, plasma is the only way to go: it simply gives the better picture and has a greater viewing angle. Of course, your needs may vary, but for my money, it's plasma or nothing.

BTW, I am distressed that manufacturers having seemingly abandoned the various 40"-ish sizes...I could only find 42" plasmas and the next size available was 50".
m
0
l
Related resources
August 4, 2012 8:58:32 AM

I think that be it plasma or LCD TV, LG seems to be the best choice, especially since they are the frontrunner in passive 3D tech. I've tried both passive and active 3Ds and passive is better IMO. Check out LG 60PV250 or if you have a lower budget go for 42PT350R. 
m
0
l
August 26, 2012 3:39:28 AM

Durgesh Bhatija said:
I think that be it plasma or LCD TV, LG seems to be the best choice, especially since they are the frontrunner in passive 3D tech. I've tried both passive and active 3Ds and passive is better IMO. Check out LG 60PV250 or if you have a lower budget go for 42PT350R. 


What's funny is how all the salesmen were trying to put me on the newer hardware, but when you started comparing features, they were neutered compared to what we had and the 550. The biggest thing for me was having a NIC and not 3D. None of the newer models had it and they were nearly twice the price!
m
0
l
a b x TV
August 26, 2012 5:26:53 PM

At least most of the manufacturers sell a wifi/NIC adapter for a farily decent price (50 USD). If you aren't interested in the newest tech, an older model works just fine. Unfortunately, to get the tip top best image quality, you have to pay for the rest of it :( 

m
0
l
August 26, 2012 5:46:27 PM

jcoultas98 said:
At least most of the manufacturers sell a wifi/NIC adapter for a farily decent price (50 USD). If you aren't interested in the newest tech, an older model works just fine. Unfortunately, to get the tip top best image quality, you have to pay for the rest of it :( 


What cracks me up is that the store was trying to lay the LG 6500 (I believe that's its name), on me for like $1,100, when the 550 was only $600 and the 550 had way more features on it! This wasn't a purchase out of want but of need- the kids busted the plasma in the bonus room and that's the room where my SO spends a lot of time in!
m
0
l
August 27, 2012 11:00:49 PM

It is a bit difficult to find ~40 inch plasma screen TV's at this point in time, but there are plenty of impressive LCD/LED sets for this size. A few examples are the Samsung LND630 and the Toshiba L5200 (for picture quality rather than features).
m
0
l
August 27, 2012 11:12:11 PM

Yeah, it's just that I don't like LEDs/LCDs.
m
0
l
!