6,vISQ~~60_35.JPG)
led tv matte screen image
Q. A TV under $2000 and not a power hog? Exclude sharp, or DLP type tvs. What is the best way to test or determine whether for instance like the differences between the tvs for different refresh rates say 60hz, 120hz or 240hz etc? What are your experiences with your tv that you have just purchased did you get a good deal and where did you find the deal?
Answer
Look into a Panasonic plasma. You can find up to a 50" for under $2000. LCD's are not worth the money. Pretty much any plasma you'll find out on the market now will out-perform any LCD you put it up against, even an LED. And dont be scared off by what some people may say about plasma's. Most of their information is out-dated. Burn-in is no longer an issue. You'd have to be TRYING to burn-in an image for it to even be an issue, even then its only temporary. Any burn-in will correct itself after normal viewing on the TV. Image retention on any LCD is permanent. Although its extremely difficult on either type of set. LCD's have poor response times which lead to motion-blur. Most newer plasma's have .001ms response times(almost instantaneous) where the best LCD response time I've ever seen is 2.4ms, with most LCD's having between 4-6ms response times. LCD's have poor viewing angles(when you move off center you lose picture quality and color) when comparing it to any plasma. And contrast and color accuracy are far better on any plasma. "Well what about glare?" loads of people would say. The only LCD's which actually combat glare have extremely matte finish screens. The color on those sets are horrible. It's as though youre looking at the picture through a foggy window, the colors extremely dull and faded. LCD's with the best color have a gloss on their screen which give equal amounts, if not more, glare than a plasma. As for power consumption, plasmas do use more power, but we're talking about $1 more than an equal size LCD. You can use the money you saved getting a plasma towards that $12 a year extra you'd be using. In the end, look up any LCD v Plasma rating that actually gives you a winner(not just state the differences) and you'll find plasma's blow LCD's out of the water. Plasma= more TV for less money.
Look into a Panasonic plasma. You can find up to a 50" for under $2000. LCD's are not worth the money. Pretty much any plasma you'll find out on the market now will out-perform any LCD you put it up against, even an LED. And dont be scared off by what some people may say about plasma's. Most of their information is out-dated. Burn-in is no longer an issue. You'd have to be TRYING to burn-in an image for it to even be an issue, even then its only temporary. Any burn-in will correct itself after normal viewing on the TV. Image retention on any LCD is permanent. Although its extremely difficult on either type of set. LCD's have poor response times which lead to motion-blur. Most newer plasma's have .001ms response times(almost instantaneous) where the best LCD response time I've ever seen is 2.4ms, with most LCD's having between 4-6ms response times. LCD's have poor viewing angles(when you move off center you lose picture quality and color) when comparing it to any plasma. And contrast and color accuracy are far better on any plasma. "Well what about glare?" loads of people would say. The only LCD's which actually combat glare have extremely matte finish screens. The color on those sets are horrible. It's as though youre looking at the picture through a foggy window, the colors extremely dull and faded. LCD's with the best color have a gloss on their screen which give equal amounts, if not more, glare than a plasma. As for power consumption, plasmas do use more power, but we're talking about $1 more than an equal size LCD. You can use the money you saved getting a plasma towards that $12 a year extra you'd be using. In the end, look up any LCD v Plasma rating that actually gives you a winner(not just state the differences) and you'll find plasma's blow LCD's out of the water. Plasma= more TV for less money.
Would you recommend a plasma or an LCD flat screen?
Tera M
My husband and I are looking to buy a flat screen. I've seen and read the differences, but which is preferred by the consumer?
Answer
LCD - is the everyman HDTV. It is cost effective, hence its popularity. It is also physically lighter than Plasma. It tends to draw less power than Plasmas as well (though good Plasmas are now beating LCDs). It has a matte finish so is useful for rooms that have too much ambient light which can not be controlled. LCD whites are a bit brighter than Plasma whites (but how often do you crank your brightness to 100%). LCDs are considered better for gaming (but I don't think you'd be disappointed with gaming on a modern Plasma). LCDs are sharper in SD (think evening news instead of film); this isn't a good vs bad, its just a personal preference thing.
It has problems with fast motion though. That is why you see ones advertised with 120Hz refresh rates. This does not come close to Plasma though. So they aren't as good for fast motion (sports and movies). The new 240Hz ones with LED backlighting are making good strides, but right now you're paying a HUGE premium for those features.
Plasma - they have better blacks, contrast, and motion blur. They are better TVs, but you often do have to pay a bit of premium for them. Images look smoother. They have greater ranges in blacks/whites so you get greys instead of clumps of black and white. The colors in Plasmas tend to have more "pop" to them; this isn't a good vs bad thing, its just personal preference. Plasmas are great for fast motion (sports and action movies).
Plasma's are glass though so are glossy. They can have reflection issues if you are in a room with lots of light that you can't control (you can't turn off the lights and you don't own any blinds). Also for SD viewing they are a bit "softer" (think more like film less like the evening news). This isn't a good vs bad thing, its personal preference. Most plasma owners get used to it and don't mind it.
They do have to be conditioned. The gasses of new Plasmas need to be conditioned. All you have to do is keep the brightness/contrast cranked way down for the first 100-200 hours, then optimize, and you'll have an amazing TV experience.
Plasma myth (1) - They experience burn-in. This is BS, those days are gone. Just condition the gasses and then use it as normal and you're fine. Also, the better sets have built-in features to prevent this (on top of the technology just generally being better now than say 5 years ago).
Plasma myth (2) - They have short life spans. This is more BS. You can leave your Plasma on 24/7 for 34 years before killing it. So do you think you'll still want/own the same TV in 15 years, let alone 30?
Plasma myth (3) - They won't work in high altitude because of problems for the gasses. This is again no longer an issue. Current Plasmas can be purchased and used in mile high Denver, and above, so you'll be fine where ever you are (unless you're living in the Himalayas).
Plasma vs LCD - One important note though is TV size. In 42" and above you see and get the benefit of the Plasma advantages. But 40" and smaller and the benefits are diminishing. So if you're going way smaller than LCD is likely the better option.
Plasma brands - Pioneer Kuro Elite is the best, followed by Pioneer Kuro. But these can cost as much as a small car. Panasonic Viera is the next best and is much more cost effective. Then I would go with Samsung.
LCD brands - I would stick with Samsung, Sharp Aquos, and Sony (but only Sony if its on sale, otherwise it tends to be overpriced). Sony stopped manufacturing LCD panels, they now buy/use the same ones used in the Sharp Aquos sets. Samsung is a step above the rest if you go with the 5, 6, 7, or 9 series models.
LCD - is the everyman HDTV. It is cost effective, hence its popularity. It is also physically lighter than Plasma. It tends to draw less power than Plasmas as well (though good Plasmas are now beating LCDs). It has a matte finish so is useful for rooms that have too much ambient light which can not be controlled. LCD whites are a bit brighter than Plasma whites (but how often do you crank your brightness to 100%). LCDs are considered better for gaming (but I don't think you'd be disappointed with gaming on a modern Plasma). LCDs are sharper in SD (think evening news instead of film); this isn't a good vs bad, its just a personal preference thing.
It has problems with fast motion though. That is why you see ones advertised with 120Hz refresh rates. This does not come close to Plasma though. So they aren't as good for fast motion (sports and movies). The new 240Hz ones with LED backlighting are making good strides, but right now you're paying a HUGE premium for those features.
Plasma - they have better blacks, contrast, and motion blur. They are better TVs, but you often do have to pay a bit of premium for them. Images look smoother. They have greater ranges in blacks/whites so you get greys instead of clumps of black and white. The colors in Plasmas tend to have more "pop" to them; this isn't a good vs bad thing, its just personal preference. Plasmas are great for fast motion (sports and action movies).
Plasma's are glass though so are glossy. They can have reflection issues if you are in a room with lots of light that you can't control (you can't turn off the lights and you don't own any blinds). Also for SD viewing they are a bit "softer" (think more like film less like the evening news). This isn't a good vs bad thing, its personal preference. Most plasma owners get used to it and don't mind it.
They do have to be conditioned. The gasses of new Plasmas need to be conditioned. All you have to do is keep the brightness/contrast cranked way down for the first 100-200 hours, then optimize, and you'll have an amazing TV experience.
Plasma myth (1) - They experience burn-in. This is BS, those days are gone. Just condition the gasses and then use it as normal and you're fine. Also, the better sets have built-in features to prevent this (on top of the technology just generally being better now than say 5 years ago).
Plasma myth (2) - They have short life spans. This is more BS. You can leave your Plasma on 24/7 for 34 years before killing it. So do you think you'll still want/own the same TV in 15 years, let alone 30?
Plasma myth (3) - They won't work in high altitude because of problems for the gasses. This is again no longer an issue. Current Plasmas can be purchased and used in mile high Denver, and above, so you'll be fine where ever you are (unless you're living in the Himalayas).
Plasma vs LCD - One important note though is TV size. In 42" and above you see and get the benefit of the Plasma advantages. But 40" and smaller and the benefits are diminishing. So if you're going way smaller than LCD is likely the better option.
Plasma brands - Pioneer Kuro Elite is the best, followed by Pioneer Kuro. But these can cost as much as a small car. Panasonic Viera is the next best and is much more cost effective. Then I would go with Samsung.
LCD brands - I would stick with Samsung, Sharp Aquos, and Sony (but only Sony if its on sale, otherwise it tends to be overpriced). Sony stopped manufacturing LCD panels, they now buy/use the same ones used in the Sharp Aquos sets. Samsung is a step above the rest if you go with the 5, 6, 7, or 9 series models.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Title Post: What is the best reasonably priced LCD TV?
Rating: 98% based on 988 ratings. 5 user reviews.
Author: Yukie
Thanks For Coming To My Blog
Rating: 98% based on 988 ratings. 5 user reviews.
Author: Yukie
Thanks For Coming To My Blog
No comments:
Post a Comment