Lcd tv

[jerbear]

Is the picture as good on a LCD as a plasma tv?

[Matt Heebner]

That might be the most loaded question you could ask about a TV.
The answer depends on what your likes and dislikes are.
It has been understood that each has it's strengths and weaknesses. In a very quick nutshell:

PLASMA
pro's
smooth motion
better contrasts, better darker blacks, whiter whites

con's
may be subject to IR or image retention if left on a static image for along time
not as bright as LCD
throws off quite a bit of heat


LCD
pro's
can be used with static images with out fear of IR
very, very bright, can be used in a sunlit room with out issue
can look very realistic, like watching video instead of film

con's
'grey' blacks, contrasts not as defining as plasma
motion may be an issue
can look very realistic, like watching video instead of film

I personally like plasma for the single reason that contrasts, darks and whites are what makes a tv look it's best, but I can certainly understand why one would choose LCD.... gaming, internet surfing, etc.

[Nels Harvey]

Having just purchased a new LCD TV, I want to point out some of my considerations.  I looked at Plasma, and found the price to be very competitive.  My main objection was the glass front, where everything in the room was reflected on the screen.  The unit also was quite warm, and I learned the power consumption was markedly greater than LCD.

I looked at LCD TV's with LED back lighting.  I thought the picture was a little better than the usual florescent back lighting on regular LCD's.  The power consumption was supposed to be about 40% less than a regular LCD.  The price tag for those TV's tended to be rather high.

I went to Best Buy, where their TV's were displayed from larger to smaller from left to right.  All the 40" TV's were next to each other, and I saw a Sony on sale for $597.95.  It looked as good as the other sets there, so that is what I bought.

Since this was a second HDTV, for the Family Room, I am able to compare it with my 60" LCD RP in the living room.  Watching the Packers Thursday, I could not complain about the picture.  It compares favorably with the other TV.

Since I was a TV Engineer, trained on proper operation of TV cameras, I know what to look for in a video presentation.  I think the differences are so subtle between one system and another, that it makes little difference for just about anything you will watch.

My suggestion is to go to a TV store, and compare the sets.  Then pick the one that suits you the best.  I think they are all pretty good.

[oz]

CNET did a comparison between both technologies; they figured that, on average, a 52" LCD would cost a user ~$27/year for electricity costs (compared to ~$63 for a similar-sized plasma) based on normal usage of 5 1/2 hours of daily viewing time.

[Mark Strube]

5 1/2 hours is the average for daily viewing?! Wow... that's about a week for me.

[bschlafer]

I've been unplugging my 42" plasma during times when I'm away for extended periods under the belief that it would save energy (money).  

If you take the numbers for the 52" plasma, that would be $0.17/day.  Seems a bit low considering how warm these displays can get.  If true, then unplugging would appear to be a bigger waste of time than money.

I need to do a search on my model TV to see if there are any published numbers for energy use.


*Bill in Milwaukee


Edit: CNet confirms power usage for big screen TV's and provides this handy cross-ref chart:
http://reviews.cnet.com/green-tech/tv-consumption-chart/

These numbers seem incredibly low considering the hoopla lately about making them more green.  Pennies a day to run these things doesn't seem like much to bother about.  

I think I'll ditch unplugging the LG and instead unplug that pesky refrigerator that only keeps a ketchup bottle, a few cans of beer and a box of baking soda cold.  :-)