Plasma or LCD
 

The Tosh is going into hospital next week (see post on 27/09) but in the
mean time

yes sure its been discussed here before, which form is now considered to be
better.

my father has a Panasonic Plasma some 3 years old now and it still looks
good.....

Plasma or LCD
 

"(!)" wrote in message
...
The Tosh is going into hospital next week (see post on 27/09) but in the
mean time

yes sure its been discussed here before, which form is now considered to
be better.

my father has a Panasonic Plasma some 3 years old now and it still looks
good.....



but I still like the Toshibas unobtrusive 41.5" wide body on a 40" LCD.....I
still cannot see any other manufacturer building sets like this.

Plasma or LCD
 

Plasma are poer hungry and cause lots of interference with analogue radio.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"(!)" wrote in message
...
The Tosh is going into hospital next week (see post on 27/09) but in the
mean time

yes sure its been discussed here before, which form is now considered to
be better.

my father has a Panasonic Plasma some 3 years old now and it still looks
good.....

Plasma or LCD
 

"(!)" wrote in message
...
The Tosh is going into hospital next week (see post on 27/09) but in the
mean time

yes sure its been discussed here before, which form is now considered to
be better.

my father has a Panasonic Plasma some 3 years old now and it still looks
good.....



Depends on your usage and the size you are wanting. Anything over 46" and I
would opt for a plasma. Also, what is your main viewing SD or HD? I think
that the Panasonic plasmas are better for SD material. Non 1080p plasmas
are usually quite low resolution compared to non 1080p LCD's. Plasmas also
suffer from 'burning' problems. A friend of mine has a 42" plasma which has
a constant PS3 image burned to the screen (TBH it is only noticeable on a
dark plain image)

As previously stated, plasmas consume more energy than the equivalent LCD.

Plasma or LCD
 

The big concern for me with LCD is the way blacks "glow" grey when you watch
in a darkened room. You can fiddle about with the backlight strength and
other settings, but then you mess up the picture for daytime viewing.

Recent LCDs have got better, but it is still very noticeable - to my eyes,
at least.

The latest LCD panels have an array of LEDs to provide the backlight, so
they can be dimmed or switched off behind the dark parts of the picture,
potentially eliminating the "glow" problem and providing a vaulable increase
in contrast ratio. However, they are just becoming available for computer
monitors and cost a fortune. I think it'll be a while before they become
affordable in TVs.

To my eyes, plasma screens seem more vibrant and dynamic, and just "nicer"
to watch telly on. However, they have a clearly visible pixel mesh if you
get too close.

Frankly, neither technology is particularly satisfactory.

SteveT

Plasma or LCD
 

"(!)" wrote in message
...
The Tosh is going into hospital next week (see post on 27/09) but in the
mean time

yes sure its been discussed here before, which form is now considered to
be better.

my father has a Panasonic Plasma some 3 years old now and it still looks
good.....




For anything up to at least 47" LCD will be better on grounds of resolution.

Plasma will burn in logos, and tire with extended use (most will be at 50%
brightness after ten years normal use). They also run hotter and use more
power.

OTOH if you live in a castle and want a 60" monster in the great hall then
plasma will have the resolution and the necessary brightness.

Plasma or LCD
 

"SteveT" wrote in message
...
The big concern for me with LCD is the way blacks "glow" grey when you
watch in a darkened room. You can fiddle about with the backlight
strength and other settings, but then you mess up the picture for daytime
viewing.

Recent LCDs have got better, but it is still very noticeable - to my eyes,
at least.

The latest LCD panels have an array of LEDs to provide the backlight, so
they can be dimmed or switched off behind the dark parts of the picture,
potentially eliminating the "glow" problem and providing a vaulable
increase in contrast ratio. However, they are just becoming available for
computer monitors and cost a fortune. I think it'll be a while before
they become affordable in TVs.

To my eyes, plasma screens seem more vibrant and dynamic, and just "nicer"
to watch telly on. However, they have a clearly visible pixel mesh if you
get too close.

Frankly, neither technology is particularly satisfactory.

SteveT

A good set will adjust automatically for ambient light level.

Plasma or LCD
 

R. Mark Clayton wrote:
"(!)" wrote in message
...
The Tosh is going into hospital next week (see post on 27/09) but in
the mean time

yes sure its been discussed here before, which form is now
considered to be better.

my father has a Panasonic Plasma some 3 years old now and it still
looks good.....




For anything up to at least 47" LCD will be better on grounds of
resolution.
Plasma will burn in logos, and tire with extended use (most will be
at 50% brightness after ten years normal use). They also run hotter
and use more power.

OTOH if you live in a castle and want a 60" monster in the great hall
then plasma will have the resolution and the necessary brightness.

Panasonic do 1920x1080 plasmas at 42 inches.

I've been looking at www.avforums.com over the weekend as I'm looking at
getting a Panny plasma. Modern panels suffer from image retention which
goes away rather than screen burn.

Panasonic quote 100,000 hours as the half brightness life of the panel.
I've no idea how accurate that is.

Plasmas do use more power but I'd dispute they run hotter. All of the
plasmas I looked at in the shops at the weekend were cool. The fans weren't
even spinning.

LCDs are brighter then plasmas.

--

WCZ

Plasma or LCD
 

I can't contribute much that hasn't already been said, but if you want
a convenient summary of the differences between the technologies,
there one at the bottom of my webpage:
http://tinyurl.com/5srngy
.... standing in for ...
http://www.cemh.eclipse.co.uk/JavaJi.../ChooseTV.html

On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:16:39 +0100, "R. Mark Clayton"
wrote:

OTOH if you live in a castle and want a 60" monster in the great hall then
plasma will have the resolution and the necessary brightness.

Though neither are recommended for Errol Flynn to swing from ...

Plasma or LCD
 

A good set will adjust automatically for ambient light level.

Yes, that's true nowadays. Even so, I've found that if the backlight is low
enough to prevent glowing blacks, you lose too much brightness in the light
areas.

The LED matrix backlight sounds like a really good solution, and I think it
might completely transform LCD technology and give plasma a real run for its
money.

SteveT