best led tv with 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.
Can you explain for me what the significance of refresh rate is on TV's?
2sxy4mashr
I need to know more about tv's before I can buy a tv for myself. What does refresh rate mean? And is a higher refresh rate better than a lower one? Also, what type of tv technology is the best? LCD, Plasma, or LED, and why?
Please, if you can make it as simple as possible, that would be great! Thank You!
Answer
When you see a TV with a refresh rate higher that 60hz, it's not just performing a simple refresh at a higher rate. When you change the refresh rate on your computer for example to 75hz, it's doing just that.
On a TV, it's actually performing something called 'frame interpolation'. It's creating frames that never existed (predicting what the next frame will look like based on current motion) and inserting them in between the real frames to combat blur and loss of motion resolution. It requires a massive number of calculations, and lag is the result so it's bad for gaming, and can result in audio sync issues with surround sound systems.
It also gives major motion pictures a creepy look called 'the soap opera effect', so it makes movies look like they were shot on a camcorder. So don't buy into the hype of this feature. I have a Philips LED/LCD TV that's 120hz, and it's always off, so it runs at 60hz.
I don't know that currently Plasma or LCD can be called better overall. They each have their pros and cons. Also, there's no such thing as LED TVs, they are still LCD they just use LED for the back light.
Plasma is my overall favorite, but when there are large patches of white, like say scenes in snow, the plasma TVs are very grey. LED/LCD can show large white patches no problem. Plasma has no off angle viewing issues, more natural color, and no ugly matte screens like LCD/LED TVs. Matte combats reflections, but image quality takes a hit. Notice the high end LED TVs never have matte screens.
The LED style can be crazy thin, but the newer plasma TVs are thin enough, and thickness does nothing for image quality so, I wouldn't get to caught up in it. I own both kinds, but if forced to pick one, I'll take a high quality full 1080p plasma over LCD/LED, currently panasonic makes the best, next would be samsung, and then finally LG.
When you see a TV with a refresh rate higher that 60hz, it's not just performing a simple refresh at a higher rate. When you change the refresh rate on your computer for example to 75hz, it's doing just that.
On a TV, it's actually performing something called 'frame interpolation'. It's creating frames that never existed (predicting what the next frame will look like based on current motion) and inserting them in between the real frames to combat blur and loss of motion resolution. It requires a massive number of calculations, and lag is the result so it's bad for gaming, and can result in audio sync issues with surround sound systems.
It also gives major motion pictures a creepy look called 'the soap opera effect', so it makes movies look like they were shot on a camcorder. So don't buy into the hype of this feature. I have a Philips LED/LCD TV that's 120hz, and it's always off, so it runs at 60hz.
I don't know that currently Plasma or LCD can be called better overall. They each have their pros and cons. Also, there's no such thing as LED TVs, they are still LCD they just use LED for the back light.
Plasma is my overall favorite, but when there are large patches of white, like say scenes in snow, the plasma TVs are very grey. LED/LCD can show large white patches no problem. Plasma has no off angle viewing issues, more natural color, and no ugly matte screens like LCD/LED TVs. Matte combats reflections, but image quality takes a hit. Notice the high end LED TVs never have matte screens.
The LED style can be crazy thin, but the newer plasma TVs are thin enough, and thickness does nothing for image quality so, I wouldn't get to caught up in it. I own both kinds, but if forced to pick one, I'll take a high quality full 1080p plasma over LCD/LED, currently panasonic makes the best, next would be samsung, and then finally LG.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
