Plasma Tv/ Lcd Tv

[JacknDanny]

What is the difference between Plasma TV and LCD TV?

What are the benefits/advantages of one over the other?

Speaking to some of these dummies in the malls, they appear to be contradicting each other, so I thought I would try on here

[maipleur]

What is the difference between Plasma TV and LCD TV?

What are the benefits/advantages of one over the other?

Speaking to some of these dummies in the malls, they appear to be contradicting each other, so I thought I would try on here

I just have bought a new lcd tv and asked the guy similiar questions to your's.

I was told that plasma tv's use over twice as much electricity and they dont have a very long life span, due to how the screen is made. (plasma needs to be re "plasmatised"??

LCD's are more expensive, but just on those two points, it was clear for me which one to buy..

Then again, he might of just been trying to sell me the more expensive one out of the two.

Interested to know from others, to see if he was right??!!

[lazeeboy]

just bought a plasma 45inch ,the picture is unbelievable ,old style tv's i need glasses to see the subtitles ,with the plasma

i find i can see them without glasses .....

[maipleur]

To be honest, I think the plasma has a better picture.. It maybe just the quality of the DVD's Im buying, but I cant seem to get a perfect pic even when playing DVD's from Europe. The quality is great compared to a "dinosaur tv", but it still bleeds a bit (so to speak).

[JacknDanny]

What is the difference between Plasma TV and LCD TV?

What are the benefits/advantages of one over the other?

Speaking to some of these dummies in the malls, they appear to be contradicting each other, so I thought I would try on here

I just have bought a new lcd tv and asked the guy similiar questions to your's.

I was told that plasma tv's use over twice as much electricity and they dont have a very long life span, due to how the screen is made. (plasma needs to be re "plasmatised"??

LCD's are more expensive, but just on those two points, it was clear for me which one to buy..

Then again, he might of just been trying to sell me the more expensive one out of the two.

Interested to know from others, to see if he was right??!!

One guy said that the plasma was better if you are using if for JUST TV, but LCD was better if you were watching DVDs. Then the next guy said just the opposite??

TIT

[maipleur]

lol, ok, so we are none the wiser!

edit: one thing I did notice was, Carefour was cheap in relation to Lotus or most other shops.

I paid 49,000 Baht for the 40 inch Samsung and I got a free Samsung DVD player and surround sound.. Great sound.

I saw the same TV in Lotus for the same price with no extras.

Edited October 28, 2007 by maipleur

[JacknDanny]

lol, ok, so we are none the wiser!

YET!!!

I am sure there is some electronics expert or someone with some knowledge who can give a meaningful answer

[JacknDanny]

lol, ok, so we are none the wiser!

edit: one thing I did notice was, Carefour was cheap in relation to Lotus or most other shops.

I paid 49,000 Baht for the 40 inch Samsung and I got a free Samsung DVD player and surround sound.. Great sound.

I saw the same TV in Lotus for the same price with no extras.

Yep,

Ive noticed that in most cases prices are the same in different stores, but there are 'sweeteners' dependant on certain products

[stumonster]

To be honest, I think the plasma has a better picture.. It maybe just the quality of the DVD's Im buying, but I cant seem to get a perfect pic even when playing DVD's from Europe. The quality is great compared to a "dinosaur tv", but it still bleeds a bit (so to speak).

one thing that may help you with "bleeding" is to use component cables between the player and the TV. and also check to see if the DVD player has a setting to tell it it is playing through a High Def monitor. this has been a problem with nintendo Wii's , but if you go into the settings you can make it much better on a big LCD.

[maipleur]

lol, ok, so we are none the wiser!

edit: one thing I did notice was, Carefour was cheap in relation to Lotus or most other shops.

I paid 49,000 Baht for the 40 inch Samsung and I got a free Samsung DVD player and surround sound.. Great sound.

I saw the same TV in Lotus for the same price with no extras.

Yep,

Ive noticed that in most cases prices are the same in different stores, but there are 'sweeteners' dependant on certain products

yeah, the dvd and surround was in the catalog for 11k (their catalog ), so I was happy with the deal..

Ok, lets hear from someone who does have a clue.

[Dakhar]

For me and my Video needs...

I got a projector. They have their issues but for the money.... you can't beat the size & if one wants to, can get them at a fair price.

I bought a BenQ PE 8700 for around 1200 USD and had it brought in from the states. It throws an awesome image, and on about 120 inch screen.

go to .projectorcentral.c-m for any of you projector needs etc.

[maipleur]

To be honest, I think the plasma has a better picture.. It maybe just the quality of the DVD's Im buying, but I cant seem to get a perfect pic even when playing DVD's from Europe. The quality is great compared to a "dinosaur tv", but it still bleeds a bit (so to speak).

one thing that may help you with "bleeding" is to use component cables between the player and the TV. and also check to see if the DVD player has a setting to tell it it is playing through a High Def monitor. this has been a problem with nintendo Wii's , but if you go into the settings you can make it much better on a big LCD.

Thanks! I will have a look at that.

[jetjock]

Just use your search engine and you can spend many hours reading the hundreds of articles and forums on the pros and cons of plasma and LCD TV's. A quick summary of some of the key points of the generally recognized differences between the LCD and plasma of similar quality and size are : plasma are cheaper, top quality plasma are considered by most experts to still have an extremely slight edge in picture quality, plasma are slightly better at movement pictures such as sports. LCD are cheaper to operate, LCD does not give off a lot of heat like plasma, LCD is not subject to the burn in problem if a still picture is left too long on the screen like plasma. The list could go on and on so that is why I advise you to read some TV forums on the net. I am into big screens and personally prefer the LCD but they both have their pros and cons so it depends on what qualities are most important to you.

[JacknDanny]

Just use your search engine and you can spend many hours reading the hundreds of articles and forums on the pros and cons of plasma and LCD TV's. A quick summary of some of the key points of the generally recognized differences between the LCD and plasma of similar quality and size are : plasma are cheaper, top quality plasma are considered by most experts to still have an extremely slight edge in picture quality, plasma are slightly better at movement pictures such as sports. LCD are cheaper to operate, LCD does not give off a lot of heat like plasma, LCD is not subject to the burn in problem if a still picture is left too long on the screen like plasma. The list could go on and on so that is why I advise you to read some TV forums on the net. I am into big screens and personally prefer the LCD but they both have their pros and cons so it depends on what qualities are most important to you.

Thanks for that.

I am looking for 50'', to be used purely for TV viewing.

I watch mostly sports, although the Mrs gets to see the odd film

I am not bothered about which is cheaper to run, and as long as I get 2 or 3 years out of it I will be happy.

Which would you advise?

[pkrv]

To be honest, I think the plasma has a better picture.. It maybe just the quality of the DVD's Im buying, but I cant seem to get a perfect pic even when playing DVD's from Europe. The quality is great compared to a "dinosaur tv", but it still bleeds a bit (so to speak).

one thing that may help you with "bleeding" is to use component cables between the player and the TV. and also check to see if the DVD player has a setting to tell it it is playing through a High Def monitor. this has been a problem with nintendo Wii's , but if you go into the settings you can make it much better on a big LCD.

Thanks! I will have a look at that.

I'm not sure if I am just saying the same thing but any plasma should have an S-VHS connection (split out (signal) video only, single cable bit like a PS2 connection on a PC -(mouse or keyboard))- this was the minimum I would consider but this was 6 years ago, I'm not sure if things have improved since then. Best connection possible (second best SCART) - audio is a separate issue.

On Plasma/LCD - LCD has lagged plasma when it comes to size. It seems that it is technically easier to produce plasma at larger sizes (performance of LCD has been a challange). None the less when I bought my 42" plasma some 5/6/7 years ago it serves as an electric fire - in the summer (in the UK) I have to turn the lights out to keep the temperature down! and it can cut out from overheating!

Now will only consider LCD but also only true HD. (which my Plasma is not)

Edited October 28, 2007 by pkrv

[jetjock]

Just use your search engine and you can spend many hours reading the hundreds of articles and forums on the pros and cons of plasma and LCD TV's. A quick summary of some of the key points of the generally recognized differences between the LCD and plasma of similar quality and size are : plasma are cheaper, top quality plasma are considered by most experts to still have an extremely slight edge in picture quality, plasma are slightly better at movement pictures such as sports. LCD are cheaper to operate, LCD does not give off a lot of heat like plasma, LCD is not subject to the burn in problem if a still picture is left too long on the screen like plasma. The list could go on and on so that is why I advise you to read some TV forums on the net. I am into big screens and personally prefer the LCD but they both have their pros and cons so it depends on what qualities are most important to you.

Thanks for that.

I am looking for 50'', to be used purely for TV viewing.

I watch mostly sports, although the Mrs gets to see the odd film

I am not bothered about which is cheaper to run, and as long as I get 2 or 3 years out of it I will be happy.

Which would you advise?

I doubt whether the average TV viewer would be able to discern much difference in picture quality between LCD and Plasma of similar quality whether watching sports or a film if the pictures are adjusted with correctly (technically correct adjustment can be quite a task for the average person). The big plus for me when it comes to LCD is that they tend to be quieter as plasma have cooling fans which in some makes can make for low level backround noise plus plasma gives off heat to the room it is in (which in hot Thailand is not a plus !) . I also like the fact that I never have to worry about burn in if I accidentally forget to turn TV off and leave a still image on the screen for a few days. These LCD qualities mean a lot to me and I am willing to pay for them but if it is pure bang for the buck that someone is looking for then plasma would be the answer. Both plasma and LCD are considered to be good for at least 20,000 to 30,000 hours of viewing so length of service is probably not a consideration in choosing.

[pkrv]

Just use your search engine and you can spend many hours reading the hundreds of articles and forums on the pros and cons of plasma and LCD TV's. A quick summary of some of the key points of the generally recognized differences between the LCD and plasma of similar quality and size are : plasma are cheaper, top quality plasma are considered by most experts to still have an extremely slight edge in picture quality, plasma are slightly better at movement pictures such as sports. LCD are cheaper to operate, LCD does not give off a lot of heat like plasma, LCD is not subject to the burn in problem if a still picture is left too long on the screen like plasma. The list could go on and on so that is why I advise you to read some TV forums on the net. I am into big screens and personally prefer the LCD but they both have their pros and cons so it depends on what qualities are most important to you.

Thanks for that.

I am looking for 50'', to be used purely for TV viewing.

I watch mostly sports, although the Mrs gets to see the odd film

I am not bothered about which is cheaper to run, and as long as I get 2 or 3 years out of it I will be happy.

Which would you advise?

I doubt whether the average TV viewer would be able to discern much difference in picture quality between LCD and Plasma of similar quality whether watching sports or a film if the pictures are adjusted with correctly (technically correct adjustment can be quite a task for the average person). The big plus for me when it comes to LCD is that they tend to be quieter as plasma have cooling fans which in some makes can make for low level backround noise plus plasma gives off heat to the room it is in (which in hot Thailand is not a plus !) . I also like the fact that I never have to worry about burn in if I accidentally forget to turn TV off and leave a still image on the screen for a few days. These LCD qualities mean a lot to me and I am willing to pay for them but if it is pure bang for the buck that someone is looking for then plasma would be the answer. Both plasma and LCD are considered to be good for at least 20,000 to 30,000 hours of viewing so length of service is probably not a consideration in choosing.

Agreed on plasma- quality about the same - The fan does make a noise - heat a problem - but no burn in there is a 'screen saver' for this, bigger sizes available in plasma.

[JacknDanny]

Just use your search engine and you can spend many hours reading the hundreds of articles and forums on the pros and cons of plasma and LCD TV's. A quick summary of some of the key points of the generally recognized differences between the LCD and plasma of similar quality and size are : plasma are cheaper, top quality plasma are considered by most experts to still have an extremely slight edge in picture quality, plasma are slightly better at movement pictures such as sports. LCD are cheaper to operate, LCD does not give off a lot of heat like plasma, LCD is not subject to the burn in problem if a still picture is left too long on the screen like plasma. The list could go on and on so that is why I advise you to read some TV forums on the net. I am into big screens and personally prefer the LCD but they both have their pros and cons so it depends on what qualities are most important to you.

Thanks for that.

I am looking for 50'', to be used purely for TV viewing.

I watch mostly sports, although the Mrs gets to see the odd film

I am not bothered about which is cheaper to run, and as long as I get 2 or 3 years out of it I will be happy.

Which would you advise?

I doubt whether the average TV viewer would be able to discern much difference in picture quality between LCD and Plasma of similar quality whether watching sports or a film if the pictures are adjusted with correctly (technically correct adjustment can be quite a task for the average person). The big plus for me when it comes to LCD is that they tend to be quieter as plasma have cooling fans which in some makes can make for low level backround noise plus plasma gives off heat to the room it is in (which in hot Thailand is not a plus !) . I also like the fact that I never have to worry about burn in if I accidentally forget to turn TV off and leave a still image on the screen for a few days. These LCD qualities mean a lot to me and I am willing to pay for them but if it is pure bang for the buck that someone is looking for then plasma would be the answer. Both plasma and LCD are considered to be good for at least 20,000 to 30,000 hours of viewing so length of service is probably not a consideration in choosing.

Appreciate the help, I just worry about the statement............."(technically correct adjustment can be quite a task for the average person)". I fall well below that category when it comes to electronics

[rgs2001uk]

Just use your search engine and you can spend many hours reading the hundreds of articles and forums on the pros and cons of plasma and LCD TV's. A quick summary of some of the key points of the generally recognized differences between the LCD and plasma of similar quality and size are : plasma are cheaper, top quality plasma are considered by most experts to still have an extremely slight edge in picture quality, plasma are slightly better at movement pictures such as sports. LCD are cheaper to operate, LCD does not give off a lot of heat like plasma, LCD is not subject to the burn in problem if a still picture is left too long on the screen like plasma. The list could go on and on so that is why I advise you to read some TV forums on the net. I am into big screens and personally prefer the LCD but they both have their pros and cons so it depends on what qualities are most important to you.

Thanks for that.

I am looking for 50'', to be used purely for TV viewing.

I watch mostly sports, although the Mrs gets to see the odd film

I am not bothered about which is cheaper to run, and as long as I get 2 or 3 years out of it I will be happy.

Which would you advise?

jack

the problem you have in thailand isnt the tv its the signal that comes down the line from ubc, i assume thats what you are using,

the other week i was looking at sony 40/42 inch lcds about 60,000 up to 90,000 baht, various different model numbers x series, s series j series etc.

what one of the guys told you is true, all these different models have different specs, one model will give you a better picture because you are watching a dvd movie, however they will all give you the same picture quality when you watch satellite tv, irrespective of the spec, as i said before it depends on the signal coming in that will affect the output, crap in crap out.

if you intend just to watch mainly tv get the one with the lowest spec, its cheaper.

you will be amazed at the number of these showrooms with their tvs on and hooked up to some sony promotional dvd and yes you can tell the difference, some of these stores detune certain tvs to make the picture look poorer than the models they want to sell you.

anyway, i asked the salesman to hook 3 tvs up to normal thai tv, you couldnt tell the difference in picture quality, as far as i know this hd ready is just a sales pitch, ubc doesnt broadcast in hd yet, so you are basically paying for something you will get no benefit from.

most of the new plasma tvs have antiburn built in, the bottom line is go with what you are happy with price and picture wise.

i am not going to digress about the benefits of one over the other, personal choice, another thing to ask the saleman is what is the life in hours of the tv, 60,00 hours, 80,000 hours etc, you probably wont keep the tv that long anyway, but you can do the sums yourself, another thing to ask is does the tv actually have a tuner/reciever inside, some are just screens, so you wouldnt be able to watch tv without having a ubc modem.

[harald finehair]

I was looking at a new LCd Tv , and I asked the sales man to connect

It up to the UBC setup they had running on the some other Tv’s in the shop

So I could see the picture, the sales Guy said … No can do - not have correct

Cable..? can show DVD . Some thing did not sound right …. How come the other Tv’s were showing UBC …? And he would not show UBC on this LCD Tv I Was looking at

[Upcountry]

rgs2001uk, I'm with you about source being the biggest factor.

In old hi-fi speak, they used to say the stylus made the difference relative to the speakers, etc.

My main source right now is UBC/cable. Bad as it is, the variety is better than the iffy DVD's in the marketplace here.

At some point we'll be able to get content over the Internet (for a price).

For my next TV, I'm holding out for OLED (organic LED).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLED

http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/08/sonys-1...inch-oled-hdtv/

http://www.ledsmagazine.com/news/4/10/6

Sony just released some smaller models, but it won't be long before larger screens are available.

"Sony says that its "Organic Panel" used in XEL-1, which has been in production since September 2007, provides advantages such as high contrast, high peak brightness, good color reproduction and rapid response time."

The overall lifespan may be shsorter, but energy consumption will be less and last I heard it will beat LED and Plasma for quality (contrast, etc.). As far as lifespan, things are changing so fast that with e-ink and other stuff we'll be painting our walls with TV in a few years anyway.

Meanwhile, my 32" does okay with UBC. I've been thinking of setting up a projector and screen for DVD's.

Another thing to think about with your TV is inputs. Can it take computer input? Personally, I'll be hooking up a computer interface for visual data (album covers etc.) and control of digital music via the surround sound unit at some point. With FLAC, APE, AIF and (gag, mp3) we can keep most of our music available via a menu instead of popping CD's in and out in the entertainment space. Same for movies.

Good luck with your research and choices!

[jetjock]

JacknDanny--As you will soon discover, debating the pros and cons of plasma and LCD can go on forever as one can see by the many forums on the internet devoted strictly to this subject. If you start reading all the info available on the subject, it can get so confusing that it can drive you to drink ! (sorry I'm there already ) The fact is that finding the perfect TV in every aspect is like finding the perfect woman--neither exists ! (my wife would probably disagree with me on that statement). One thing that I forgot to mention earlier that may be significant in your case is 'glare' ( it is significant to me) if you have a lot of light in your room. LCD handles the glare problem much better than plasma. Some of plasma screens now have what they call anti-glare screens but they are usually not quite as effective at handling the glare problem. CNET is a great place for reading reviews of TV's. They just tested out a new model of Panasonic 50" plasma that they said had the best picture they had ever tested. In the final analysis, unlike the video techies, most of us average viewers will never notice many of the slight differences between the two types if they are of the same quality. As someone once told me, just decide how much money you want to spend and then go out and find the best TV in the screen size you want for that amount of money.

[Ducati]

Having just brought a LCD 46 at Carrefour a few weeks back I was very dissapointed with the picture coming down the cable from UBC.....the guys then swapped that for a Plasma 50 which did have some minor improvement but overall the picture from UBC is far better on my CRT 36......so I guess big is not always best.....

Both still excellent with DVD's though.

[dave_boo]

What decided me was simply their construction. LCD panels make a black pixel by attempting to shut off that pixel's translusence. Of course some light is going to bleed through, and around because of LCD's backlight. Plasma, on the other hand, simply doesn't illuminate that pixel. I will agree that a projector, especially an OLED, DLP, or a lust-worthy LCOS model is a super safe bet for most people.

[jetjock]

Appreciate the help, I just worry about the statement............."(technically correct adjustment can be quite a task for the average person)". I fall well below that category when it comes to electronics

I forgot to mention that you can buy a TV Calibration DVD's that will lead you through the process of adjusting your TV picture for optimum quallity. You mentioned that you are getting a 50" TV so you will be spending a good sum of money and may want to consider it however the factory preset adjustments are fine for most people however some people prefer to tweak the picture for best results. The main reason it is hard or impossible to make a fair side by side comparison of TV's in a store is that they may be adjusted wrong or not set to their optimum adjustments which is why the pictures may vary and one appear better than the other.

[PadThaiGuy]

"(plasma needs to be re "plasmatised"?? "

Plasmatised? That's a good one.

If you are watching cable, the flat screens are just not worth it. The older CRTs do a better job.

I tried the top end Panasonic 50" Plasma and the top end Sony 46" LCD. Picture was TERRIBLE.

Sent them both back and continue to watch my 10 year old Sony TV.

Only consider the flat panels if you plan on watching DVDs is my advice.

Tons of info at the AVS Forum.

[ignis]

When you buy be sure to ask the seller to plug in the the TV...

I looked at about 10 different both LCD and Plasma 40 - 46".. the plasma had much a better picture.

I bought in the 'Big' Sale at Home Pro.... 46,200 baht the same Panasonic Plasma in both Tesco and Carrefour was 79,900 baht..

Don't forget ALL the big stores have web sites so can easy check the prices and what is on promotion.

The picture is WOW, crystal clear on Thai TV, Sat TV, and DVD, I cannot tell the difference

Edited October 29, 2007 by ignis

[harald finehair]

Hi ignis,

......The picture is WOW, crystal clear on Thai TV, Sat TV, and DVD, I cannot tell the difference

is the Sat TV from UBC and whats it like..? is it WOW ...?

Thanks ...

[jimmym40]

I'm not expert, but I spoke with two of my friends that are "knowledgeable" in electronics and the latest gadgets. They both recommended the LCD.

I too did extensive searching for info about 8 months back. As previous posters said, a huge amount of information to decifer. But I came up with my decision from this all to buy a 40" Samsung LCD. I'm very happy with it, excellent picture from UBC. I requested that the store, Carefour, hook up the TV at the store so I can view a "real" picture from UBC. They had no problem doing it. If you have looked at all the TVs in the stores, they all use DVDs to show their pictures, which is somewhat misleading. Of course, you will always get better results using DVDs versus cable.

One thing for sure about Plasmas - use much more energey, and give off alot of heat, and a shorter life span versus the LCD models.

My own personal view, Plasmas may be on the way out. The LCDs will take over or new technology will make them disappear.

[ignis]

Hi ignis,

......The picture is WOW, crystal clear on Thai TV, Sat TV, and DVD, I cannot tell the difference

is the Sat TV from UBC and whats it like..? is it WOW ...?

Thanks ...

NO....... why anyone would have UBC is beyond me... I have a move system and receive over 2,600 channels from around the world both 'KU' and 'C' bands, there are 28 sats over Thailand, so why pay for a very small crappy one.