Plasma or lcd?

[Mickael]

I want a large screen to watch the World cup in my bedroom
Lcd or Plasma?
Hdtv?
And the most important for me is to connect my pc to it,got my wall ready to fit the screen
Any advice or recommendation?
What about the connection?

Budget £ 1200

[directhex]

how big is your room?

consider how far you are from your screen - too close to a large screen, and it'll look crappy.

similarly, consider the source material - SD input on a large HD screen, close up, will disappoint.

plasma is usually for large screen (>37"), and you'llpay over £2k for HD. lcd is for smaller (23"->37") screens, and is often HD. a 26" HD set, with assorted inputs (including VGA) is about £600-£650

[nvening]

for your buget i would look at LCD only, a good plasma is expensive

[mart_haj86]

LCD FTW!, i here plasmas need to have the gas topped up every 3 or so years ,,, or something like that anyway, dell do some nice TFT hd tvs for example this one >>> http://accessories.euro.dell.com/sna...ctlisting.aspx its at 1400 pound but by the time the world cup starts i have a feeling that price may drop (possibly to 1200?)

[Funkstar]

mart, sorry, but thats rubbish. There are many myths as fas as plasma is concerned and thats one.

http://www.panasonic.com/consumer_el...12&cont_id=822

search for 'plasma myths' and you will see.

[Jonny M]

Plasma is by far a better quality picture especially in terms of contrast. The downside is the power it uses, the heat produced, and the cost.

[Funkstar]

...and the weight and size (plasmas are generally thicker than LCDs)

Certainally plasmas are far better at SD content that LCD, but with HD, LCDs can look pretty good too.

Another advantage of Plasma is you will never get a stuck/dead pixel which would kind of put you off your grand+ LCD

[Jonny M]

Weight and size aren't problems once it's installed though, I was talking about things which are a disadvantage over LCDs throughout the lifetime of the screen.

Thickness is a moot point anyway, with both designs you need to leave space behind them for air to circulate.

[Funkstar]

yeah, very true. Just thought i would point it out

[Nick F]

I would go for a nice HD-Ready LCD making sure it had all of the needed connections. Spend the money saved on a nice Amp and speaker set and a yerly sub to the new Sky HD service.

Sorted

[cableguy]

I would never take an LCD if a plasma was an option. Your budget should get you something like a 37" 37PWD8 or 42" 42PWD8 Panasonic screen, which despite being SD panels will still give the overall better picture with far more realistic contrast ratios and black levels that LCD can only dream of. Once an LCD is out of the high brightness shop floor and into a normally lit living room only then can you actually see where the LCD doesn't have any black levels to show, nor any detail within. LCD does obviously have the higher resolution, but we've got to put it into context. A 32" screen with 1280x768 pixels viewed from 10ft away is not gonna look any sharper than a 37" screen with 852x480 pixels. Conversely, if there is any black (or indeed variable whites) detail to be seen, even though the LCD had the more pixels it doesn't have the colour range to show the details correctly (or at all) where the plasma does. Finally, a plasma will be bigger

[Odc]

I got the 32" Samsung LE32R41BD from dabs.com for £830. It is HD up to 1080i and it has a vga input as well as scarts, composite, component, HDMI etc. It's an excellent tv. It aslso has an inbuilt freeview tuner.

[Rack]

Conversely, if there is any black (or indeed variable whites) detail to be seen, even though the LCD had the more pixels it doesn't have the colour range to show the details correctly (or at all) where the plasma does.

I'd like to know more about this... I've seen some stunning LCD's that compete very well with plasma at all ranges of light level. I think people too often buy cheap thinking it will perform well, but it's all in the control electronics, not the glass, that says what levels are available... interesting, I also read this in your panasonic link:

Very often, televisions, including plasma, are shipped from the factory with the contrast control at a high setting to provide a bright picture under typical dealer showroom lighting conditions. In your home, the room light levels are usually one half or less than that in retail showrooms

Burn In
Much has been written about the possibility of permanently marking a plasma screen by viewing a static image on the screen for too long. This is often referred to as “static image burn in,” which is a misnomer. The phosphors are never “burnt,” rather they are unevenly aged.

This is what I have seen over and over again on Plasma's, the number that were used in airports for information screens that became useless over a year because of 'unevenly aged' pixels. While it is not a problem for most people with regular TV usage, I have seen a lot of businesses chucking out lots of plasma screens.

LCD's cannot suffer from this as they are just blocking and filtering from a white backlight - and the polarity on the liquid crystal is changed every scan, so there can be no 'polarisation' as such.

I have seen huge improvements from the LCD industry in the last 5-6 years, and now contrast ratios, viewing angles and brightness levels compete very well with plasma.

[5lab]

i would go for the samsung 42" plasma (£1200) or the 40" lcd (£1100 iirc)..

[pp05]

In all honesty i haven't been impressed with LCD based HDTV compatible sets. Samsung and Panasonic stand out.

[j.o.s.h.1408]

LCD ALL the way! i heard that plasma screens dont last long...