If anyone is looking for a new TV...
09-21-2009, 01:48 PM
#16
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
Ive compared side by side the highest of the high end monitors and plasma still has an issue with burn in and brigtness. LCDs, while not being as clear for moving pictures, are so much better. The blacks and colors are just about as crisp as plasma and they are going to look that way for years to come.
LED or DLP is going to give you the best picture, why not get that?
LED or DLP is going to give you the best picture, why not get that?
The best picture I've ever seen come from a Sim2 DLP projector, but that's like $40k! Next would be Laser TVs from Mitsubishi. Next would be OLED, but that's never going to be big screen sizes in the next 2 years. The most promising is SED, but who knows when the legal battles will end over that. It's definitely the one I'm most interested in, hope it will develop into a real TV for consumers.
09-21-2009, 01:53 PM
#17
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
As an example about power consumption my family watches 9hrs of TV a day between about 7 of us. When we went from CRT to DLP to Plasma we saw no more than $15/mo in electricity change.
I replaced an old fridge that was eating about 150w when running, and it would run about 18hrs a day it was so bad. I saved $80/mo by changing that out for some new one that only runs like 4hrs day to keep cold.
So having an appliance or unit that uses a lot of energy for little hrs is not as bad as one that uses little energy for much longer periods of time.
I replaced an old fridge that was eating about 150w when running, and it would run about 18hrs a day it was so bad. I saved $80/mo by changing that out for some new one that only runs like 4hrs day to keep cold.
So having an appliance or unit that uses a lot of energy for little hrs is not as bad as one that uses little energy for much longer periods of time.
09-21-2009, 01:58 PM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: ur mom
Posts: 978
Car Info: ugly piece of ****
You compared them where?
1) Burn in is NOT an issue for regular viewing anymore. Not for black bars, network logos, nothing. It would take grave negligence on a users part to burn in a plasma these days.
2) Heat? my 58" runs cooler than my old DLP, and definitely cooler than any CRT.
3) Yep, power consumption is a *****, but at 14 cents a KWh, it won't be more than $20-40/mo even for a heavy user.
4) Picture fade? 100,000hrs to half life. if someone has their settings very high, maybe that can be halved, but still at 50,000hrs we are talking years of time to half brightness.
5) Durability how? if you are talking about defects they are few and far between for all TV sets. less than 3% for any type of television today for DOA or other new unit failures.
1) Burn in is NOT an issue for regular viewing anymore. Not for black bars, network logos, nothing. It would take grave negligence on a users part to burn in a plasma these days.
2) Heat? my 58" runs cooler than my old DLP, and definitely cooler than any CRT.
3) Yep, power consumption is a *****, but at 14 cents a KWh, it won't be more than $20-40/mo even for a heavy user.
4) Picture fade? 100,000hrs to half life. if someone has their settings very high, maybe that can be halved, but still at 50,000hrs we are talking years of time to half brightness.
5) Durability how? if you are talking about defects they are few and far between for all TV sets. less than 3% for any type of television today for DOA or other new unit failures.
1) all it takes is someone to not calibrate their unit initially and leave an leave something on with a static image for a couple of hours and you have instant burn in. Its MUCH less of a problem now, but it still exists.
2&3) They run much hotter than LCD and draw more power. depending on how much you use it, you may lose the cost of the unit over 5 years. Sure, they draw less than CRT/DLP, but thats not saying much.
4) Like I said, pictures fade considerably on plasma. Ive seen it with my own eyes. Ive installed an NEC plasma in one room then come back a year later and installed a larger plasma in an adjoining room and the new one was much brighter. Thats only one year. It may not be 50%, but its 20-30% brighter.
5) circumstantially, Ive seen more plasmas come through DOA than large format LCDs.
09-21-2009, 02:00 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: ur mom
Posts: 978
Car Info: ugly piece of ****
As an example about power consumption my family watches 9hrs of TV a day between about 7 of us. When we went from CRT to DLP to Plasma we saw no more than $15/mo in electricity change.
I replaced an old fridge that was eating about 150w when running, and it would run about 18hrs a day it was so bad. I saved $80/mo by changing that out for some new one that only runs like 4hrs day to keep cold.
So having an appliance or unit that uses a lot of energy for little hrs is not as bad as one that uses little energy for much longer periods of time.
I replaced an old fridge that was eating about 150w when running, and it would run about 18hrs a day it was so bad. I saved $80/mo by changing that out for some new one that only runs like 4hrs day to keep cold.
So having an appliance or unit that uses a lot of energy for little hrs is not as bad as one that uses little energy for much longer periods of time.
09-21-2009, 02:21 PM
#20
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SF East Bay, CA
Posts: 342
Car Info: 2003 WRX Wagon
Currently, I think plasmas and LCDs are still competitive with each other especially around the 50" size. As you go larger than that, the plasma gains a price advantage. Smaller than that and LCDs have the price advantage.
Peformance-wise, here's my opinion, most of which has already been mentioned in this thread:
Plasma advantages:
1. Fluorescent backlight is old tech, you get white uniformity issues and poor dynamic contrast. It uses more electricity than LED backlights. The best you could do with fluorescent backlight is make sure you get something that has dynamic dimming, which has similar effect as the variable shutters in the older digital RPTVs.
2. LED backlight with local dimming is the latest craze for performance. You get better dynamic contrast, approaching plasmas. But you sacrifice in color uniformity and may also see edge blooming. To solve this they need denser arrays of LEDs and different control schemes for local dimming that drives the cost up. This is the current top of the line which means you pay more for it and it's still not perfect.
3. LED edgelight is purely for the thin cabinet so women will accept a huge TV in their living room. There are no performance benefits and is purely marketing for the "look how thin my TV is" crowd. I mean, if you watch your TV more when it's turned off than on, you shouldn't even be in this discussion. It causes so many problems with color uniformity that I just can't believe people are believing the hype.
For LCDs my preference for backlighting goes something like this:
1. LED backlit with local dimming, choose highest density array to avoid blooming and uniformity problems.
2. Fluorescent backlit with dynamic dimming.
3. LED backlit with dynamic dimming.
4. Fluorescent backlit w/o dimming.
5. LED backlit w/o dimming.
6. LED edgelit.
I'm still using a 50" Sony SXRD1 (LCoS) RPTV which was reputedly the best quality digital display of the last few years and I can still see image quality issues. Most normal people don't see them, but I can if I look for it. Every display technology has problems, DLP has image noise in dark areas and clipping of low (near black) gray levels, not to mention rainbow effect (due to colorwheel in single-chip consumer sets) for some people.
Just decide on your application and budget, then choose the best display for you. Don't let other people tell you what's good as one person may be watching movies in a room with controlled-lighting while another person is playing videogames in broad daylight.
Peformance-wise, here's my opinion, most of which has already been mentioned in this thread:
Plasma advantages:
1. Higher dynamic contrast ratio
2. Faster true refresh rate
3. Better color accuracy and uniformity
4. Higher pixel fillrate
LCD advantages:2. Faster true refresh rate
3. Better color accuracy and uniformity
4. Higher pixel fillrate
1. Non-reflective screen
2. Higher intensity color
3. Lower power consumption
4. Lighter weight (Does this really matter?)
For LCDs, there are fluorescent or LED backlighting as well as LED edgelighting. Each has its own problems.2. Higher intensity color
3. Lower power consumption
4. Lighter weight (Does this really matter?)
1. Fluorescent backlight is old tech, you get white uniformity issues and poor dynamic contrast. It uses more electricity than LED backlights. The best you could do with fluorescent backlight is make sure you get something that has dynamic dimming, which has similar effect as the variable shutters in the older digital RPTVs.
2. LED backlight with local dimming is the latest craze for performance. You get better dynamic contrast, approaching plasmas. But you sacrifice in color uniformity and may also see edge blooming. To solve this they need denser arrays of LEDs and different control schemes for local dimming that drives the cost up. This is the current top of the line which means you pay more for it and it's still not perfect.
3. LED edgelight is purely for the thin cabinet so women will accept a huge TV in their living room. There are no performance benefits and is purely marketing for the "look how thin my TV is" crowd. I mean, if you watch your TV more when it's turned off than on, you shouldn't even be in this discussion. It causes so many problems with color uniformity that I just can't believe people are believing the hype.
For LCDs my preference for backlighting goes something like this:
1. LED backlit with local dimming, choose highest density array to avoid blooming and uniformity problems.
2. Fluorescent backlit with dynamic dimming.
3. LED backlit with dynamic dimming.
4. Fluorescent backlit w/o dimming.
5. LED backlit w/o dimming.
6. LED edgelit.
I'm still using a 50" Sony SXRD1 (LCoS) RPTV which was reputedly the best quality digital display of the last few years and I can still see image quality issues. Most normal people don't see them, but I can if I look for it. Every display technology has problems, DLP has image noise in dark areas and clipping of low (near black) gray levels, not to mention rainbow effect (due to colorwheel in single-chip consumer sets) for some people.
Just decide on your application and budget, then choose the best display for you. Don't let other people tell you what's good as one person may be watching movies in a room with controlled-lighting while another person is playing videogames in broad daylight.
Last edited by CharT; 09-21-2009 at 02:25 PM.
09-21-2009, 03:23 PM
#22
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
Ive compared them here, at work. This is what I do for a living: evaluate and make recommendations on audio/video equipment. For the money, I like the panasonic plasmas, but I see much better quality from panasonic's LCD and NEC LCDs.
1) all it takes is someone to not calibrate their unit initially and leave an leave something on with a static image for a couple of hours and you have instant burn in. Its MUCH less of a problem now, but it still exists.
2&3) They run much hotter than LCD and draw more power. depending on how much you use it, you may lose the cost of the unit over 5 years. Sure, they draw less than CRT/DLP, but thats not saying much.
4) Like I said, pictures fade considerably on plasma. Ive seen it with my own eyes. Ive installed an NEC plasma in one room then come back a year later and installed a larger plasma in an adjoining room and the new one was much brighter. Thats only one year. It may not be 50%, but its 20-30% brighter.
5) circumstantially, Ive seen more plasmas come through DOA than large format LCDs.
1) all it takes is someone to not calibrate their unit initially and leave an leave something on with a static image for a couple of hours and you have instant burn in. Its MUCH less of a problem now, but it still exists.
2&3) They run much hotter than LCD and draw more power. depending on how much you use it, you may lose the cost of the unit over 5 years. Sure, they draw less than CRT/DLP, but thats not saying much.
4) Like I said, pictures fade considerably on plasma. Ive seen it with my own eyes. Ive installed an NEC plasma in one room then come back a year later and installed a larger plasma in an adjoining room and the new one was much brighter. Thats only one year. It may not be 50%, but its 20-30% brighter.
5) circumstantially, Ive seen more plasmas come through DOA than large format LCDs.
I don't sell TVs for a living, I sell a DVD Player and Bluray player, but I never talk about them at all.
I'm much more interested in helping out people pick out what they are looking for in a TV set.
It's up to you to see how long you will keep a TV set, and no matter what, you will have to pay for the electricity a TV creates. But seriously, if you want to save money and buy the prius of TVs, LED LCDs are there for you.
Or you can spend the same or slightly more, and get something more like a WRX for your money.
I think energy consumption is not as important and what you buy a TV for, to watch and enjoy TV.
09-21-2009, 03:29 PM
#23
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
Currently, I think plasmas and LCDs are still competitive with each other especially around the 50" size. As you go larger than that, the plasma gains a price advantage. Smaller than that and LCDs have the price advantage.
Peformance-wise, here's my opinion, most of which has already been mentioned in this thread:
Plasma advantages:
1. Fluorescent backlight is old tech, you get white uniformity issues and poor dynamic contrast. It uses more electricity than LED backlights. The best you could do with fluorescent backlight is make sure you get something that has dynamic dimming, which has similar effect as the variable shutters in the older digital RPTVs.
2. LED backlight with local dimming is the latest craze for performance. You get better dynamic contrast, approaching plasmas. But you sacrifice in color uniformity and may also see edge blooming. To solve this they need denser arrays of LEDs and different control schemes for local dimming that drives the cost up. This is the current top of the line which means you pay more for it and it's still not perfect.
3. LED edgelight is purely for the thin cabinet so women will accept a huge TV in their living room. There are no performance benefits and is purely marketing for the "look how thin my TV is" crowd. I mean, if you watch your TV more when it's turned off than on, you shouldn't even be in this discussion. It causes so many problems with color uniformity that I just can't believe people are believing the hype.
For LCDs my preference for backlighting goes something like this:
1. LED backlit with local dimming, choose highest density array to avoid blooming and uniformity problems.
2. Fluorescent backlit with dynamic dimming.
3. LED backlit with dynamic dimming.
4. Fluorescent backlit w/o dimming.
5. LED backlit w/o dimming.
6. LED edgelit.
I'm still using a 50" Sony SXRD1 (LCoS) RPTV which was reputedly the best quality digital display of the last few years and I can still see image quality issues. Most normal people don't see them, but I can if I look for it. Every display technology has problems, DLP has image noise in dark areas and clipping of low (near black) gray levels, not to mention rainbow effect (due to colorwheel in single-chip consumer sets) for some people.
Just decide on your application and budget, then choose the best display for you. Don't let other people tell you what's good as one person may be watching movies in a room with controlled-lighting while another person is playing videogames in broad daylight.
Peformance-wise, here's my opinion, most of which has already been mentioned in this thread:
Plasma advantages:
1. Higher dynamic contrast ratio
2. Faster true refresh rate
3. Better color accuracy and uniformity
4. Higher pixel fillrate
LCD advantages:2. Faster true refresh rate
3. Better color accuracy and uniformity
4. Higher pixel fillrate
1. Non-reflective screen
2. Higher intensity color
3. Lower power consumption
4. Lighter weight (Does this really matter?)
For LCDs, there are fluorescent or LED backlighting as well as LED edgelighting. Each has its own problems.2. Higher intensity color
3. Lower power consumption
4. Lighter weight (Does this really matter?)
1. Fluorescent backlight is old tech, you get white uniformity issues and poor dynamic contrast. It uses more electricity than LED backlights. The best you could do with fluorescent backlight is make sure you get something that has dynamic dimming, which has similar effect as the variable shutters in the older digital RPTVs.
2. LED backlight with local dimming is the latest craze for performance. You get better dynamic contrast, approaching plasmas. But you sacrifice in color uniformity and may also see edge blooming. To solve this they need denser arrays of LEDs and different control schemes for local dimming that drives the cost up. This is the current top of the line which means you pay more for it and it's still not perfect.
3. LED edgelight is purely for the thin cabinet so women will accept a huge TV in their living room. There are no performance benefits and is purely marketing for the "look how thin my TV is" crowd. I mean, if you watch your TV more when it's turned off than on, you shouldn't even be in this discussion. It causes so many problems with color uniformity that I just can't believe people are believing the hype.
For LCDs my preference for backlighting goes something like this:
1. LED backlit with local dimming, choose highest density array to avoid blooming and uniformity problems.
2. Fluorescent backlit with dynamic dimming.
3. LED backlit with dynamic dimming.
4. Fluorescent backlit w/o dimming.
5. LED backlit w/o dimming.
6. LED edgelit.
I'm still using a 50" Sony SXRD1 (LCoS) RPTV which was reputedly the best quality digital display of the last few years and I can still see image quality issues. Most normal people don't see them, but I can if I look for it. Every display technology has problems, DLP has image noise in dark areas and clipping of low (near black) gray levels, not to mention rainbow effect (due to colorwheel in single-chip consumer sets) for some people.
Just decide on your application and budget, then choose the best display for you. Don't let other people tell you what's good as one person may be watching movies in a room with controlled-lighting while another person is playing videogames in broad daylight.
What you are talking about in your RPTV is called Macroblocking. It's a byproduct of video compression, esp in MPEG 2 feeds used in Standard Def. It's typical to see in DLP, LCoS or CRT RPTVs since, for whatever reason, RPTVs enhance any macroblocking in the video feed.
09-21-2009, 10:17 PM
#24
Registered User
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Jose
Posts: 2,765
Car Info: 2011 2.5i Spark Silver
I'm going get a new tv for my mom but i don't want to spend much and i want to get something 40inch plus. She won't watch blu-rays or "MIGHT" use HD she just needs a bigger TV, she has a 15 year old 20inch now... Any advice?
09-21-2009, 10:18 PM
#25
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
Crappy Iphone picture, but I think it shows the amount of depth with Contrast and the correct colors.
Definitely have been enjoying this years NFL season so far. Even though I've had great TVs for about 7 years now, I've been away from football. Making a big effort to watch, and always enjoy watching TV or movies at home.
09-21-2009, 10:40 PM
#28
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
Sear site is down right now, so from best buy I picked out the following.
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....=1218011400290
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....=1218065493446
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....=1218062117241
Of the 3 I'd recommend the Panasonic if you want really awesome picture, but if it's for your mom and she's not super serious the Toshiba will do. The sony is the best LCD of the two LCDs, but slightly out of your budget.
And I'll look at some sears sets tomorrow.
But again, if you can wait 6-8 weeks, that would be great, but seriously, prices are pretty damn cheap right now.
09-21-2009, 10:54 PM
#29
Registered User
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Jose
Posts: 2,765
Car Info: 2011 2.5i Spark Silver
yeah i think i might just get her a TY stand now since today was her B-day and for x-mas she'll get the TV since I'll be able to get them cheap then.
Thx a Bunch!
Thx a Bunch!
09-21-2009, 10:55 PM
#30
Registered User
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Jose
Posts: 2,765
Car Info: 2011 2.5i Spark Silver
what about this i know its probably crap but supposedly LG makes it and its dirt cheap
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....=1218035133352
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....=1218035133352