Printable View
I want a new tv for my bedrooom , my current tv is a 32 inch crt, and i spend a lot of time on the xbox 360 and watching dvds, ive been to currys and seen a 47 inch lg tv i really like 1080dpi etc, i just want to know if there is anything to watch, this tv is around £780 and is a lcd.. There is just such a large range, i really dont want to get the wrong tv.
A wise man in the know once told me that if it's over 38", forget LCD and go plasma.
really! whys that? there seems to be some great quality massive lcd's out there. phillips 108":eek: and samsung 70" being the biggest ive seen, and very clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mart
Ye i saw one of those 108 inchers in some tv magazine, was about 70 grand if i remember :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by raj
Dollars that is :coffee:
I've got a Samsung 40" LCD and its fine. Great for the PS3. :agree:
plasma's are much cheaper then the lcds though, reason being the tubes leak, and they suffer from screen burn, the tvs must be completely vertical, (cant be tilted),and basically i just got warned away from them at all cost.
this is the one im looking at ,
http://www.dixons.co.uk/martprd/stor...rmationSection
A great forum to use for any technology questions is http://www.avforums.com/, have used them many a time :agree:
To house a 47" screen you must have a big bedroom!!
In the lounge, I've got a 50" plasma and it looks ok, but the lounge is 6.5m x 5m.
Also, I agree with Mart, anything over 38" go for plasma.
AVForums will tell you all you need to know, and will also confirm about plasma being better than LCD over a given size.
I'm not saying the difference is night & day, but it's been tested & proved that that's the case, and not by some sharky Comet's geeza who reckons 'Double Dragon is pixel perfick on this mate, innit mate'.
It's also a complete load of cr8p about the modern day plasma screens burning out. People who tell you that are talking bollox.
:crap:Quote:
Originally Posted by djinuk
:sad2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by djinuk
Biggest pile of pish I've read in a post for a long time.
52" Phillips Ambilight is what I have in the main room, mounted and angled. No leak or screen burn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy-G
Compensating for something Billski? ;)
Screen burn will only occur when a static image is constant... ie, if a helpdesk department were to use a Plasma for their monitoring screen.
But yes, pish... im yet to see a plasma thats cheaper than an LCD...
My parents have 42" ... Hitachi think 1086 dp thing- and its sh*t... blury pic, pixels are crap as Mart would agree when he was down... http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Produc...7C10199303.htm
I have a 37" lcd high def etc etc, and you can tell the difference, its alot more clearer than the Hitachi thing.. http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Produc...7C10199303.htm
Tbh i cant see why you would need anything over 40" but thats just my personal opinion.
You know me Tim; hung like a two year old :laugh:
As for needing more than 42", if you have a large room, you do appreciate the difference.
Anyway, They have a 60" in Costco I want. I can get the 52" for the Garage then. Mwuhaha:smokin:
ermm ok , well i am just going off what ive been told, as for prices, well just look around, everywhere the 40+ inch plasmas are like £500 mark, and lcds start around £650.
my bedroom is ermm, rather large, 47 inch wont be a prob in there
in my experience the best tv out there at the moment is the series 6 samsung. Out of all the tvs i have seen this blows the sock offs the all. My mate managed to pick a 42'' series 6 for 800 quid . The specs are mental with 50:000 - 1 contrast ratio , 1080P and has loads of hdmi conections in the back. As for the difference between plasma and lcd i would say what ever floats your boat as the problems that you used to get with plasmas like screen burn etc are non existent in new sets and only were a problem when they first came out. There are so many to choose from these days and all at good prices its better just going into a shop and seeing which one youlike the look of the best . But if it were me SERIES 6 SAMSUNG;);)
Personally I have a Toshiba 37" 1080p LCD in my room, could have had a larger size for less money but that had the best picture in my price range and my room isn't that big so looks the part :)
It is all down to personal preference with T.V's imo.
thats only a 720 p could get a 1080 for that mate .;)
..
http://www.unbeatable.co.uk/buyinggu...isions/32.html
Pro's of plasma's in my opinion outweigh the con's.
Pro's of LCD..
* Screen life? Sure it won't last as long, but do you really plan on owning it for 20 years.. Plus, something else on the TV will let go by then no doubts..
* Screen burning? I bet you would have to throw some serious still images for a long time at a plasma before you even need to start worrying about that..
* Power consumption? Pah - that's for girls.
Pro's of Plasma..
* Response times? Awesome.. Better quality picture
* Viewing angle? OK, so you practically always sit infront of your TV, but still a genuine usable pro (compared to your LCD lasting 40 years rather than 20 :rolleyes:)
* Colour saturation? Awesome.. Better quality picture
So yeh - get an LCD if you're a girly.. get a Plasma if you're a man :agree:
:eek:
Quote:
Originally Posted by djinuk
Before you crack open another tin of fail, posting websites showing plasmas cheaper than LCD's is completely pointless & proves feck all. I could show you a link of a Ferrari 355 being cheaper to buy than a Skyline GTR, but it doesn't mean the Ferrari is a steal & the car to own out of the 2 :rolleyes: :sad2:
You listen to who you want, but you're barking up the wrong tree if you go LCD @ 47".
Imho.
Yay.. Mart cracks open the fail again :D
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by Mart
dude, i am posting exactly what i see, .. if i read prices on plasmas that are cheaper than lcd, and then post the site to show you, than please explain to me how the hell does that not prove that they are indeed cheaper ??
I am taking all advice onboard, and my reason for posting this topic is indeed for advice, and all of it is much appreciated.
I am not in anyway saying that the lcd, must therefore be the better option due to price, but i am just quoting the prices i have been given/viewed on websites.
Quote:
Originally Posted by djinuk
He never denied the fact that they are cheaper.. What he said was that they are cheaper, but not necessarily better.
what is the power consumption of say a 46 inch plasma compared to a crt 32 inch rouhgly.
Why am I getting drawn into this...
Ok, seeing as we're at the stage of posting websites, here ya go - An LCD tele, same size as the plasma unit you linked previously, made by a good company, and shock horror, it's cheaper:
http://www.directtvs.co.uk/Toshiba_4...DB/version.asp
All that proves is this a nonsensical argument...
im not arguing, im asking for advice, jeez,
And it was given, yet you're still trying to row the LCD/cheaper prices shpiel failboat.
:laugh:
"Row, row, row your boat...."
yes but if you read my query a few posts above i am actaully questioning the power consumption on plasma tvs, as i will take a look into them.
Gently down the fail stream.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiny Tim
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily,
Life is but a fail.
A plasma tele, in most cases, will consume more power than an LCD of similar/same size.
I didn't realise we were comparing tv's from a carbon footprint angle though...
well it was more a crt 32 inch i was comparing it to, reason being i already have 3 servers running continous , so i have to keep a eye on power consumption you see. I know plasma will use more than a lcd, but i was just wondering what they compare like to a crt.
Lol.. Didn't you know, we all care about that sort of stuff in this club :scared:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mart
Couldn't. Give. A. Phuk.Quote:
Originally Posted by BriC
well no, not so much the carbon footprint, but maybe more to the fact that more power consumer = more cost, more cost = less cash to spend else where. The way this country is going you cant really overlook things like that else you will end up with a very dismal standard of living. :coffee:
See my previous answer.
Wait untill you have kids; then you're just used to writing cheques like a madman anyways:laugh:
A few more spins of the meter isn't going to make the difference. Sadly.
lol, yes most likely, dont plan on that anytime soon though :P
Couldn't have said it better myself. But that's a whole different tin of worms.Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy-G
Quote:
Originally Posted by djinuk
Quote:
Originally Posted by djinuk
:laugh:
His rowing boat has just become a 93ft Sunseeker...
I have no idea what a sunseeker is, but does it have lots of comfy sofas and 50inch LCD TV's in it? Obviously because LCD is better.. :D
ok, i guess i will just leave that thread there, thanks for the advice, ill look into the plasma's aswell then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BriC
http://www.powerandmotoryacht.com/bo...-predator-108/
LCD FTW :laugh:
LOL.. I was nearly there.. 42" LCD.
I would advise going pioneer :)
done a bit of scouting about on my lunch, and read up on the 'myths' of leaking plasma tubes etc.. only thing that concerns me is image burn and things on the larger plasma's would i be better off going for say a 42 inch or similar,
*sigh*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mart
Invisible post bump...
i can see a handbags at dawn moment coming up :argue: :scared:
i don't quite understand what is with the attitude ? Have i actually done something wrong, or is it simply because i have not been on these boards for a very long while.
Either way my apologies..
One of my pals a few months back bought an LG 42" 1080p LCD for about £700 or so.
For PS3 and PC games, it's pretty good.
A fair bit better picture quality, colour, contrast, than he Acer 37" 720p LCD that he bough a few months before that.
With 1080p TV, it's very good. 720p TV is less good than on a 720p TV I would guess as when setting the picture size on the LG to 720p for a 720p program it's fully sharp. It loses it a bit when scaling that to 1080p.
Dynamic contrast ratio is only 10,000 or maybe 15,000. But good looking picture, non the less.
Viewing angle is a factor in an long big room like another pal, 30' x 15' as the TV will be at one end facing across the room but people will be watching the footy, or whatever from a settee at the other end as well.
In both cases their perpendicular viewing distance is about 9 to 10 feet. The pal with the LG, the 42" seems fine. Quickly get used to it being there. I scarcely noticed the size increase from the upgrade from 37". Seems like bigger would be fine as that distance. Pixels might start to look more apparent though.
In my listening room, which is also my TV room, the speakers are about 13" from the settee. At that distance I'd need a screen with a 12 foot diagonal to equivocate to the width of the cinema screen showing a 2.35:1 film (cinemascope) or 10' diagonal for 16x9.
Next year OLED TVs should be around in large sizes. Static contrast ratio, 1 million to one. Screen thickness, 3mm. Seems they can roll up, like projection screens. Whether they will, and the size and cost remains to be seen. The screens are made using inkjet printing. Apparently they last indeffinitely.
No-one here has mentioned picture judder with LCD TV's. For me it makes the picture unwatchable. I had to get out of Curries as the LCD judder was giving me a headache.
I'm not sure if Plasmas have this problem. The response time on them is, apparently, instant. I don't if that will do it. The larger room pal just when off to buy the new Panasonic Plasma. There are several in the range. Price for the 2nd best, without the FreeSat, was about £850. 47" maybe that was.
By juddering, do you mean the picture phasing you get with detailed images such as peoples hair?
No I mean as images move they appear to flash / strobe across the screen.
Toshiba tried to do something about this with the Regza range by creating a new image and fitting it in between each other normal image, thereby doubling the number of images per second.
Not at all, and no need to stir the sh1t either.Quote:
Originally Posted by tobester
T'was a throw away remark, and on reflection out of order, apologies.:ashamed:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mart
One of my friends has a 42" Samsung Plasma (I forget the model) and it is pretty kick ass. I was impressed with the picture quality of his sky channels (non HD) compared to the inferoir picture quality that my 32" Goodmans (yes, I'm cheap) produces. When plugged into the HDMI port on the PS3 it really comes into its element, perfect picture quality and awesome gaming all-round! One thing I have noticed with his TV though is that when watching some sky channels the picture occasionly flicks to a greeny tinge bu then disappears again, but I think this may be down to his scart leads. Otherwise, a fantastic TV and at a pretty good price.
Ive always bought the biggest Toshiba I could afford. That rule has never let me down ever.
Sony are overpriceced. Toshiba are generally as good a picture but wih fewer features.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy-G
Thats because you havent got SKYSPORTS NEWS on 24/7 or fall asleep with it on the sky tv guide page.
lol
Plasma do burn images into screens, thats a fact, however, like with anything if you look after it theres no need to worry.
LCD is superior in most respects, Plasma is kinda to the wallet.
Im not gonna bother arguing which is better.......but
Gotta go :agree: with Mart on this! Plasma all day long. Ive had a Panasonic plasma for over 5 years now,used everyday tv and xbox 360. not one problem in that time. its getting on a bit now but it still plays everything i throw at it, for a 852x480p set, a 720p and 1080p picture from my HTPC is faultless.
Without getting too technical, IMO LCD give a computer screen type image, if you want a cinemalistic feel go with a plasma.
Ive also got a DLP projector which i bought over an LCD, again for the superior picture.
Like Dawn said, Join the AVforums great site!
As always though, whenever anything like this is debated, you get your for example... i love LCD team...and I love Plasma team.
The fact that you know little about the subject (no offence) to the untrained eye, you prob wouldnt tell much difference between either, whichever you buy im sure you will be over the moon with it.
Like everything in this world though, You get what you pay for! ;)
All the best. :agree:
New poster! (less than 10 posts)
Ive got a 40" LCD sony bravia and well pleased with it. I paid a grand for it a few months back, but it can be had a fare bit cheaper now. Its 1080p and contrast ratio is 16000:1 so not amazingly high but a very good pic in my opinion. There is alot of views on which to go for and i must say the chap i spoke to in the shop advised to go LCD at 40". I looked at a 50" plasma but it was a poorer quality pic ,this was due to the TV being of poorer quality not because LCD is better. You would need a big room to go over 40" really? Ive got a 25 foot living room and chap in shop said id need to sit roughly 17ft from a 50" to get the quality??? how true this is im not sure but up close in the shop it was poo! My one however is good at 2ft or 15ft+.
Fail. We've already established the new units don't, and that's a legit fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenobi
Fail again. Twice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenobi
:rolleyes: :sad2:
Lol :agree::laugh:
New poster! (less than 10 posts)
If you want a big screen at the moment a nice panasonic plasma is the TV of choice for me. Even though you can get 2ms LCDs you still end up with ghosting and it pisses me off a treat.
Any screen if left on a constant image will "burn" an image after a long period of time.
As for the life of the unit, who the funk is gonna be watching an LCD in 40 years time lol
How many static images are likely to be displayed 24/7 on a home tv?Quote:
Originally Posted by Clio GTT
Brad has a Panasonic Plasma. He told me it retains an effect of a morning TV logo.
He also said the logo 'burn' does fade by the evening or next morning.
New poster! (less than 10 posts)
very few but i've seen images left from E4 etc, it does happenQuote:
Originally Posted by Mart
New poster! (less than 10 posts)
Ahh the big lcd vs plasma debate still raging a year after I bought mine :)
I spent ages researching mostly on avforums but I finally went with a 42" Panasonic plasma.. I've never regreted it, the picture is fantastic..
Basically my findings were that plasmas were generally better on the larger screen but generally you get what you pay for and the other but is that you generally find you get a better quality plasma for the price of a lesser quality lcd. However if you have the money the processors in the LCD's have improved alot..
as for screen burn this shouldn't be confused with image retention, yes if I'm having an epic game fest sometimes I'll see a faint logo or static element on the screen but this disappears pretty swiftly. Screen burn is considered as permanent and I haven't experienced this.
I got mine from empire direct for a greand with 5 year parts and labour
Personally I would pic from one of the following and you wouldn't regret it.. (make sure it comes with a stand or pedestal unless you're wall mounting) but it's always worth checking reviews available around the net
http://www.empiredirect.co.uk/conten...creen+Size.htm
However I found this whilst I was there £799 reduced by £700 it sounds a steal but I would just check through all the reviews first - oh and I found watching normal terestral tv always looked better on the plasma.. I spent ages staring at screens in John Lewis :)
http://www.empiredirect.co.uk/conten...DL46D3500U.htm
Hope that helps
New poster! (less than 10 posts)
I always thought Plasmas only had a native resolution of 1024 x 768, so couldnt do true HD, but the way the screens are lit, they look better at nights (Blacker blacks) whereas LCD`s look better in the day, but all I do know is I have a Projector on a 6ft wide screen and Double Dragon looks the ****ing nuts :laugh::laugh:
in the end i brought the lcd toshiba 42 inch 1080p , i took a look through the plasmas aswell but problem being im using my tv for the pc aswell, meaning yes there is good chance a static image may display on there for a long time, for exampel the start menu logo in the bottom left.. thanks for the advice given etc
New poster! (less than 10 posts)
Nice one glad you found one !!
Not the new generation ones. Technology has moved on from the 1st and 2nd generation and the Phospherous reaction process. Do try to keep up at the back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenobi
Not what any genuine expert I've ever talked to has told me. Or any on line review. Or what the Glasgow branch of this lot told me when I had my house kitted out - http://www.sevenoakssoundandvision.co.uk/home.aspxQuote:
Originally Posted by Kenobi
Oh, and Ian makes a good point about the LCD judder. I've noticed that as well on them. Apparently the cheap screens are famous for it.
that's probably down to the frame rate.. plasmas don't seem to suffer from that ..Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy-G
I think this is what a lot of people are getting confused with. If I'm playing a game through the S-Video port on my PS2 through my 32" LCD I will sometimes see an image on the screen even though the actual picture has changed. For example, when I play Tourist Trophy I have a rev counter down the bottom right, when I finish the race and the screen loads up the next track I can still see the rev counter very faintly. This only happens though if an image is on the screen for a long time, kinda like a rev counter in a game I guess... Not a problem, won't damage your TV, happy days :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Warren
ghosting... yea LCDs do that.
I would advise Plasma, and probably Pioneer.
New poster! (less than 10 posts)
Plasma's FTW! :smokin: