Plasma versus LCD
 

If you can tolerate a larger screen size (58" is
the smallest), consider an ultra-thin LCoS from
JVC. Compared to DLP, no rotating filter, lower
wattage lamp, brighter image.
--
pj

Cbeyond wrote:
I have both LCD and Plasma. Plasma wins hands down in picture
quality. My wife can easily tell the difference, too. I have the 42"
1080p Panasonic. Consumer reports magazine also favor plasma over
LCD. Not that an LCD is bad, but I think it has to do with plasmas
much greater contrast ratio, even if this rating is inflated. The
blacks are really black and there is much more shadow detail in my
plasma.

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 19:58:37 GMT, "WGD"
wrote:

About to hit the market for a 46" unit. Considering, seriousy, a DLP (rear
space not a problem); also to void the problem of fliter life, I am consider
an LED-driven unit. Glare off of plasmas is very objectionable (our
viewing is both at day and night); LCDs ?, do not have a strong opinion
here.

Where, please, is my thinking wrong? i.e. drive for an LED-driven DLP. Or
does my thinking need a bit of adjustment?

Wayne



"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
wrote in message

Plasma gives more vivid colors, no motion blur, and a
lifetime that is longer than most would keep a tv for
anyway!!!!! Reflection varies by maker. YOU have to
judge that.
It's not like LCDs last forever. The actual liquid crystal and the
colored filters are complex organic chemicals that degrade due to light,
heat, and time. It's arguable that DLP might be the most stable, but again
they include colored filters that can degrade.

Plasma versus LCD
 

In article writes:

Plasmas do lose brightness over time. The gas has a half-life so over a
period of time (let's say 2 years) they lose half their brightness and
in another 2 years their brightness drops in half again.

The brightness reduction is in the phosphor, not the gas.

I don't recall
what the half-life of the gas is though. With that said, many companies
are advertising 60,000 and 80,000+ hour lifetimes for their plasma
displays and that is based on an 8 hour day which equates to over 20
years if I recall correctly from the last time I did the calculations.
Basically, based on manufacturer ratings, they are just as good as CRTs.

Actually, they are several times better in lifetime than CRTs.

Alan

Plasma versus LCD
 

"WGD" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
About to hit the market for a 46" unit. Considering, seriousy, a DLP
(rear space not a problem); also to void the problem of fliter life, I am
consider an LED-driven unit. Glare off of plasmas is very objectionable
(our viewing is both at day and night); LCDs ?, do not have a strong
opinion here.

Where, please, is my thinking wrong? i.e. drive for an LED-driven DLP.
Or does my thinking need a bit of adjustment?

Wayne

Good choice. I'm happy with my surprisingly svelte Samsung 61" that uses the
LEDs. Size really does matter! After two months with this size screen, I
could not imagine anything less than 55"-60" size for living room viewing.
For what I paid for the DLP, I would have had to make do with far smaller
LCD or plasma TVs. The rear projection picture is as good overall as the
other types. Unless you plan to hang the thing on the wall, go with a rear
projection and buy the biggest you can. YMMV

Plasma versus LCD
 

I have both LCD and Plasma. Plasma wins hands down in picture
quality. My wife can easily tell the difference, too. I have the 42"
1080p Panasonic. Consumer reports magazine also favor plasma over
LCD. Not that an LCD is bad, but I think it has to do with plasmas
much greater contrast ratio, even if this rating is inflated. The
blacks are really black and there is much more shadow detail in my
plasma.

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 19:58:37 GMT, "WGD"
wrote:

About to hit the market for a 46" unit. Considering, seriousy, a DLP (rear
space not a problem); also to void the problem of fliter life, I am consider
an LED-driven unit. Glare off of plasmas is very objectionable (our
viewing is both at day and night); LCDs ?, do not have a strong opinion
here.

Where, please, is my thinking wrong? i.e. drive for an LED-driven DLP. Or
does my thinking need a bit of adjustment?

Wayne



"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
wrote in message

Plasma gives more vivid colors, no motion blur, and a
lifetime that is longer than most would keep a tv for
anyway!!!!! Reflection varies by maker. YOU have to
judge that.

It's not like LCDs last forever. The actual liquid crystal and the
colored filters are complex organic chemicals that degrade due to light,
heat, and time. It's arguable that DLP might be the most stable, but again
they include colored filters that can degrade.