iPwn
i like the led, my boyfriend likes the lcd. which is ultimately better? and if you can, please list pros and cons for both. thanks in advance.
Answer
first, led tv's are lcd panels with led lights.
lcd tv's are lcd panels with ccfl lighting.
led tv's use less energy because of the lighting system and give superior contrast ratio, pushing 3 million to 1 as opposed to an avg. 40k to 70k on a standard lcd, even the sony xbr9 lcd is only 100k to 1. that means darker darks and brighter brights on an led tv.
two types of led. edge lighting and full array. the samsung 6000 series is an edge lit tv. that makes it super slim, less than 2 inches almost. with this all your lights are pointing inwards. with that said to adjust the darkness, lets say middle of the tv, all the lights need to be dimmed.
second type is full array, size wise they are about as thick as a regular lcd because they have led lights across the entire back of the tv. is this better? i think so. you have better light control. the tv will only adjust a specific set of lights that need to be adjusted to control the darkness of a specific spot. not any extra ones. power wise, i'd say the same.
sure, edge lighting may have less lights, but they have to output more light to reach the center, whereas full array or full matrix lighting only has to travel a short distance from the back of the tv. both are amazing pictures regardless. dont be sold on the thickness of the tv, you will not know the difference when you're sitting infont of the thing 6 feet away. brand wise, most major ones make it. sharp, sony, lg, samsung are the big ones i know of off hand.
now your standard lcd tv's aren't bad, but not the latest and greatest. inferior lighting resulting in lower contrast ratio (that's big in my book since any big tv you buy will be full 1080p hd, and almost always 120hz nowadays). hooked up to a blu-ray, it'll be stunning. led's will look better. and everybody going green these days led's are picking up steam.
if you don't have a hd service from a company, or don't wach blu-rays wth an hdmi cable., and intend to hook up basic cable, get a standard lcd, as you will not be using the full potential of the led tv by any means. email me if you have any other questions or wanna know about cabling or the 120hz/240hz etc etc. =)
bottom line, led's are a better, newer technology, but do you want to spend the money on it.
ps. don't do a dlp like that guy says, yes, they can produce 1080p signals BUT! horrible viewing angle, have to be right infront of the tv,dead center to see the best picture, move to the side and it darkens out because of the screen. PLUS YOU HAVE TO CHANGE A BULB! every few years (2-4 with regular use), and those aren't cheap, averaging 200 bucks. yes you get a new tv when you change it, but it's an additional costs, lcd's last about 60k hours, led's are being said to last 100k to 120k hours, twice as long. dlps are a old technology. most stores don't even carry them anymore.
to the guy below.
not all led's are slim, just edge lighting ones. full array are still thick, about 4 inches, check the lg and sharp ones.
first, led tv's are lcd panels with led lights.
lcd tv's are lcd panels with ccfl lighting.
led tv's use less energy because of the lighting system and give superior contrast ratio, pushing 3 million to 1 as opposed to an avg. 40k to 70k on a standard lcd, even the sony xbr9 lcd is only 100k to 1. that means darker darks and brighter brights on an led tv.
two types of led. edge lighting and full array. the samsung 6000 series is an edge lit tv. that makes it super slim, less than 2 inches almost. with this all your lights are pointing inwards. with that said to adjust the darkness, lets say middle of the tv, all the lights need to be dimmed.
second type is full array, size wise they are about as thick as a regular lcd because they have led lights across the entire back of the tv. is this better? i think so. you have better light control. the tv will only adjust a specific set of lights that need to be adjusted to control the darkness of a specific spot. not any extra ones. power wise, i'd say the same.
sure, edge lighting may have less lights, but they have to output more light to reach the center, whereas full array or full matrix lighting only has to travel a short distance from the back of the tv. both are amazing pictures regardless. dont be sold on the thickness of the tv, you will not know the difference when you're sitting infont of the thing 6 feet away. brand wise, most major ones make it. sharp, sony, lg, samsung are the big ones i know of off hand.
now your standard lcd tv's aren't bad, but not the latest and greatest. inferior lighting resulting in lower contrast ratio (that's big in my book since any big tv you buy will be full 1080p hd, and almost always 120hz nowadays). hooked up to a blu-ray, it'll be stunning. led's will look better. and everybody going green these days led's are picking up steam.
if you don't have a hd service from a company, or don't wach blu-rays wth an hdmi cable., and intend to hook up basic cable, get a standard lcd, as you will not be using the full potential of the led tv by any means. email me if you have any other questions or wanna know about cabling or the 120hz/240hz etc etc. =)
bottom line, led's are a better, newer technology, but do you want to spend the money on it.
ps. don't do a dlp like that guy says, yes, they can produce 1080p signals BUT! horrible viewing angle, have to be right infront of the tv,dead center to see the best picture, move to the side and it darkens out because of the screen. PLUS YOU HAVE TO CHANGE A BULB! every few years (2-4 with regular use), and those aren't cheap, averaging 200 bucks. yes you get a new tv when you change it, but it's an additional costs, lcd's last about 60k hours, led's are being said to last 100k to 120k hours, twice as long. dlps are a old technology. most stores don't even carry them anymore.
to the guy below.
not all led's are slim, just edge lighting ones. full array are still thick, about 4 inches, check the lg and sharp ones.
Which is better plasma or led tv?
Sam
im thinking of buying a new tv and im going to play alot on my xbox 360. So which is better for it?
Answer
LED is just a form of LCD. While the LED backlight improves the color, contrast, and blacks of a LCD set, it does not fix the inherent refresh flaws of the technology. So you can still suffer from motion blur (ghost trails). However, I think all LED sets are at least 120Hz refresh if not 240Hz. It is as good as LCD can offer you to cope with the issue.
LCD is a matte finish, so can be better for rooms with too much ambient light. LCDs on the whole tend to use less power than Plasma (and CRT). However, not all models are made equal. Also there are now Plasmas that can compete on that front as well.
LCDs are the better choice however in smaller sets. That's why you'll not see the major plasma manufacturers making sets in under 40". You just don't get the advantages of Plasma in smaller sets as much (and definitely not in a bang-for-buck scenario). So size does matter in your decision making process.
Plasma's suffer from a number of myths. Modern plasmas do not suffer burn-in, not half decent brands at least. They have come a long way since their early days. To play it safe you can condition the TV. For the first 100-200 hours, keep the contrast and brightness cranked down. Then optimize and enjoy.
Plasmas do not have shorter life spans. There are Plasmas rated to 100,000 hours that cost way less than LCDs. At 8 hours a day, 365 days a year, that's 30+ years of life. Every model, LCD or Plasma is different. Neither technology is inferior on this front.
Plasmas do not have problems with high altitudes anymore. Again, early models had this flaw, but modern ones do not. You can own a plasma safely in mile high Denver, so unless you're in the Himalayas, you should be fine.
For plasma, go with Panasonic. They are the best, affordable, option out there for you. Pioneer Kuro Elite is technically better, but the price tag is steep. Samsung and LG make reasonably well reviewed sets as well if you just don't dig Panasonic.
If you need an LCD, because of size or preference, Samsung is the world leader. Sony and Sharp also make really strong sets too. In the 26" - 37" range, Panasonic is actually a top tier choice as well. While known for their plasmas, they actually make extremely top notch LCDs in that size. LG does make some good LCDs as well, but do your homework on the models.
Plasma has a near instantaneous refresh rate (like CRT) and suffers no motion blur problems. Plasma has superior colors, blacks, and contrast, even to LED LCDs.
LED is just a form of LCD. While the LED backlight improves the color, contrast, and blacks of a LCD set, it does not fix the inherent refresh flaws of the technology. So you can still suffer from motion blur (ghost trails). However, I think all LED sets are at least 120Hz refresh if not 240Hz. It is as good as LCD can offer you to cope with the issue.
LCD is a matte finish, so can be better for rooms with too much ambient light. LCDs on the whole tend to use less power than Plasma (and CRT). However, not all models are made equal. Also there are now Plasmas that can compete on that front as well.
LCDs are the better choice however in smaller sets. That's why you'll not see the major plasma manufacturers making sets in under 40". You just don't get the advantages of Plasma in smaller sets as much (and definitely not in a bang-for-buck scenario). So size does matter in your decision making process.
Plasma's suffer from a number of myths. Modern plasmas do not suffer burn-in, not half decent brands at least. They have come a long way since their early days. To play it safe you can condition the TV. For the first 100-200 hours, keep the contrast and brightness cranked down. Then optimize and enjoy.
Plasmas do not have shorter life spans. There are Plasmas rated to 100,000 hours that cost way less than LCDs. At 8 hours a day, 365 days a year, that's 30+ years of life. Every model, LCD or Plasma is different. Neither technology is inferior on this front.
Plasmas do not have problems with high altitudes anymore. Again, early models had this flaw, but modern ones do not. You can own a plasma safely in mile high Denver, so unless you're in the Himalayas, you should be fine.
For plasma, go with Panasonic. They are the best, affordable, option out there for you. Pioneer Kuro Elite is technically better, but the price tag is steep. Samsung and LG make reasonably well reviewed sets as well if you just don't dig Panasonic.
If you need an LCD, because of size or preference, Samsung is the world leader. Sony and Sharp also make really strong sets too. In the 26" - 37" range, Panasonic is actually a top tier choice as well. While known for their plasmas, they actually make extremely top notch LCDs in that size. LG does make some good LCDs as well, but do your homework on the models.
Plasma has a near instantaneous refresh rate (like CRT) and suffers no motion blur problems. Plasma has superior colors, blacks, and contrast, even to LED LCDs.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Title Post: are lcd or led tvs better?
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