plasmas

[BIG SEXY]

couldnt find a better category to talk about T.Vs so im in here

latest dick smith catalogue i got has a panasonic 50" plasma in it for $1846.
for someone who enjoys their TV but isnt a junkie is this the one for me? or am i better off getting a full HD 42"
we sit about 4-5 metres away and use a ps3 on it, wont be doing too many blu rays as most of my movies will be streamed through a hard drive.
any thoughts or ideas are appreciated.

[Wedgie]

If I had a choice I'd definately go the 42" Full HD TV.
Personally I wouldn't even consider a lower def TV these days unless it was going in a rarely used room and was only a couple of hundred bucks.
And its not like Im a TV elitist because we still have a 68cm CRT TV in our main lounge. Mind you I spend more time on the PC and that has wide screen 22" Full HD 2ms.

[Wedgie]

Just talked to a tech guru at work and he agreed with what I said, he said there was no point in getting anything less than Full HD at the moment the way things are going.

[Psyber]

I saw a Panasonic 50" full HD [1080P] 600Hz subfield plasma set in Harvey Norman for [I think] $2680 - not sure if the figure is absolutely correct, but about that - could have been $2860...
I intend to have a closer look when I get back from holiday - if they are dearer by then I'll wait for the next sale.

[mick]

Naive question, what is the advantage of plasma over LCD? Does it make up for the much greater weight and power consumption?

[Wedgie]

Naive question, what is the advantage of plasma over LCD? Does it make up for the much greater weight and power consumption?

Not naive at all Mick as its the question most people ask and I think we even had a topic on here before about it. Generally the Plasma gives a better picture but it all depends on what you're after. If you watch sport then a plasma is the only way to go although LCD can give better appearances for shows where there isn't much movement.
The difference in power consumption with new plasmas compared to LCDs is neglible.
You can get varied results depending on the lighting of your room too.
I have neither but would have no hesitation in getting a plasma over a LCD.

[dedja]

If you're happy with the price then go for it.

That particular Panasonic plasma is HD with an inbuilt tuner at 1366 x 768 pixels, but not full HD at 1920 x 1080 pixels, and I think the model is TH-P50X10A.

For the same price point you could get a smaller 40" or 46" TV with better specs, but it really depends on what you want.

I've got a 3 year old Samsung 40" LCD TV which is 1366 x 768 (ie. not full HD) in a very large room and I'm more than happy with it. To be honest, the HD broadcasts are stunning, but SD (or lower) broadcasts can be quite average. Bear in mind that if you spend the dollars to get at large full HD TV, you are going to be amazed when things are in full HD, but probably very disappointed with the lower quality broadcasts as they look worse on a better quality TV. I've got Foxtel HD and while the HD channels are stunning, some of the SD channels are very ordinary.

The best thing I can suggest is to go to a large electrical store like Harvey Norman or Radio Rentals, and have a loook at the range of TVs they have. This will give you an idea of the quality of picture, size, etc ... and don't rush out and get the first shiniest one you see.

The prices of these TVs have come down dramatically and while that has slowed down a bit, they will only become cheaper.

At the end of the day, any HD TV whether it be an LCD or plasma, or HD or full HD today will give you a quality picture.

I hope this helps.

[Psyber]

I'm told Plasmas offer higher contrast and less blurring of movement, but LCDs have other advantages, which I can't recall now.
[Less blurring of movement is what matters to me.]

All the tech-heads are pushing the new LED backlit LCDs for more even backlighting of the screen, and less likelihood of expensive repairs if the older type fluorescent backlighting packs it in.
The latest is one that runs to 3-coloured LED backlighting to enhance colour display.

Plasmas generate their own light at the pixels and don't need a backlight, but that's where the power comes in, but again I've been told the extra power cost is not very much these days.

[dedja]

Naive question, what is the advantage of plasma over LCD? Does it make up for the much greater weight and power consumption?

Not naive at all Mick as its the question most people ask and I think we even had a topic on here before about it. Generally the Plasma gives a better picture but it all depends on what you're after. If you watch sport then a plasma is the only way to go although LCD can give better appearances for shows where there isn't much movement.
The difference in power consumption with new plasmas compared to LCDs is neglible.
You can get varied results depending on the lighting of your room too.
I have neither but would have no hesitation in getting a plasma over a LCD.

This can end up being almost a religious question for some but because of rapid changes to technology, the argument is less and less.

I've got 2 LCD TVs and I deliberately made that choice 3 years ago.

The sport or fast motion argument is dead and has been for a while ... there is no difference between a plasma and LCD now.

LCD are still much lighter and more energy efficient ... more so now that LED technology has come in.

The only real drawbacks to LCD is traditionally they have used a backlight, which means that blacks and dark colours aren't as deep or defined as a plasma, and they tend to be more expensive. This is also changing because of LED technology.

I think the industry is heading more towards LCD rather than plasma, but that's just a personal opinion.

In most cases, either LCD or plasma will do the job fine and the differences are for the purists.

[Wedgie]

I agree it can become a religious discussion with some, a bit like Ford v Holden.
Having neither Ive only gone on what Ive read, what my tech guru mate tells me ( who has neither too) and what my mate who sells both of them and goes to all the latest industry conferences, etc.
I agree that LCD is taking over from Plasma but it was more prevelent a couple of years ago.
Itd actually be another reason Id get a plasma as you've got more chance of picking up an improved LCD in the future.

I would suggest in this discussion that people do the study and form their own opinion and dont put too much credit on people that have on or the other as it will become the old Ive got a Holden so its better argument.

Just realised I have 2 LCDs if monitors count so better disregard my opinion.

Also another thing I just thought of is the difference in viewing angles. If a TV is going to be seen a lot from the side or is in a bright room Id definately go plasma. If you dont believe me go to the Sony shop and compare their LCD to their Plasma, it can be quite noticable.

If you have a dark room where you're always going to be directly in front and can afford a 2MS LCD then a LCD might be better.

Read up on, go see what both look like in a variety of situations and what they'd look like in a similar room to yours it is all I can say. Quite often the difference will be negated by people stuffing up the settings anyway so it definately comes down to personal preference in a lot of cases.

[RoosterMarty]

I bought a Toshiba 42" LCD HD TV a few weeks ago and it is sensational. I also use it for Ps3 (cricket looks great too) so I'd definitely recommend it

[Kahuna]

latest dick smith catalogue i got has a panasonic 50" plasma in it for $1846.
for someone who enjoys their TV but isnt a junkie is this the one for me? or am i better off getting a full HD 42"
we sit about 4-5 metres away and use a ps3 on it, wont be doing too many blu rays as most of my movies will be streamed through a hard drive.

4-5 metres is way too far away for a 42". Somebody's Law says that the apparent size of your TV is inversely proportional to the length of time of ownership. Get a bigger set.
Also at this distance the benefit of so called "Full HD" will be negligible on a screen that size.
Sounds like the Pana 50" will suit your viewing habits to a tee. I would see if one of the other retailers will beat the price,however, Dick Smith have a 15 day no questions asked return policy,assuming that holds good for TVs,you could have a free home trial for a week or 2.

[prowling panther]

I have a LG 42" HD1080 LCD TV (with remote control), it does all the things I want it to do, the picture is crystal clear and cant be faulted on the HD Chanels and is hard to notice any difference on the other chanels.

It is really a matter of choice, but I do think that LCD oner Plasma is the way to go, if you go into Radio rentals or Hardly Normal's and chech out the picture quality you will notice every television on display has a different colour setup, so trying to make a comparison between them is a really hard job, my advice is to look around, find a brand or model that you like, then see who is offering a bonus of some sort, like a Wii or Nintendo or Blueray or surround sound system and get that one, at least if you are going to spend a couple of grand, you may as well get something extra for your dollar, we got a surround sound, all singing, dancing, high faluting CD- DVD player worth $890 included in the deal (with another remote control), thats what made the deal attractive to me.

[Psyber]

I have a 2ms 22" and a 2ms 20" monitor for computers, but the "technical expert" I got a major retailer to drag out of the back room for me because the sales guy couldn't answer my questions admitted that LCD TVs don't do better than 4ms. He was a big fan of LED LCDs but those of any size are around $4000 to $5000.
So, I plan to go with the 50" plasma I described above and when it dies look and see where LCD technology is. By then bioluminescent sheets you can roll up like blinds may be the buzz.

[dedja]

... but the "technical expert" I got a major retailer to drag out of the back room for me because the sales guy couldn't answer my questions ...

oxymoron

[Psyber]

... but the "technical expert" I got a major retailer to drag out of the back room for me because the sales guy couldn't answer my questions ...

oxymoron

No, surprisingly..
This guy knew his stuff and could actually discuss with me how the sub-field circuits in the new plasmas worked and the details of LCD technology that I knew from my involvement in computer technology.
I don't know where they got him or why they hired him! They obviously kept him in a back room and dragged him out into the light rather reluctantly.
[Perhaps he is the techno-nerd son of the manager?]

[BIG SEXY]

theres bugger all HD tv broadcast in the riverland. may be irrelevant but may not.

might just go into a shop around here and check them out. i rang another bloke i know from retravision who said for a few hundred more i can have a 46" full HD. may end up going that way yet.

[Mickyj]

theres bugger all HD tv broadcast in the riverland. may be irrelevant but may not.

might just go into a shop around here and check them out. i rang another bloke i know from retravision who said for a few hundred more i can have a 46" full HD. may end up going that way yet.

We bought a 50 inch(or 52 inch)Hd plasma last year cheaper than u quoted .We bought it from betta electrical went in wanted a 42 inch.We had already sussed out the price came out with the larger Plasma for the same price as the 42 inch.bought the floor stock and cabinet then went back and bought a DVD recorder all 3 items were at a price cheaper than JB were selling just the TV for.
What ever u buy go in cash in hand and as that annoying ad says HAGGLE.
No matter what people tell you make your own mind up our TV is 1080P people at work told me but its not HMDI (or something)
All I know is great for what we watch gets all the HD channels .

Cheers

[Dutchy]

What ever u buy go in cash in hand and as that annoying ad says HAGGLE.

yep thats the best advice on here, ask for a cash price and dont do the interest free deals

I got a $4k TV dropped to $3k as soon as I asked for a cash price...

[dedja]

I got a $4k TV dropped to $3k as soon as I asked for a cash price...

... and the bastards still probably made a $1,000 profit on the deal.