LCD V Plasma Telly(7 Posts)
We are looking for a new telly and wondered what the difference was between these 2 tellys. My friend said you need to have a plasma topped up with plasma is this this correct?
Thanks in advance
This may help. Have never heard about plasma screens needing to be topped up!
What we did in the end is go and look at some. What I found is that the refresh rate on a plasma is far superior to that of a LCD screen, I could see a flicker on the LCD, and couldn't watch it! (Previously we had a traditional TV, but with 100MHz refresh, so quicker than standard).
Can recommend Panasonic Viera - when we were looking 2 years ago, nearly all the best buys were this make, I think there was 1 Sony Bravia also falling in the best buy category.
Plasma screens don't need to be "topped up with plasma". Your friend is either woefully misinformed or is having you on.
In general, plasma screens are better at really big screen sizes and LCD screens are better for smaller screen sizes. In the middle ground - currently around 40" - there's less to choose between them and the differences are getting even less every year. Plasmas do run pretty hot which can make a noticeable difference in a small room.
I've not noticed any flicker issues with an LCD. I've got a 36" Toshiba Regza in the front room and a 19" LG in the family room and both are entirely flicker-free. Plasmas do tend to do better with fast-moving on-screen objects, particularly compared to older LCDs, but the more recent LCD screens are very good at avoiding this issue provided you stay away from the very low-end models.
It is absolutely well worth going to see some. And have a look in the reviews and forums at AVForums. Bear in mind that the average avforum member is a
massive geek technophile so they tend to be seriously picky and many of them are never entirely satisfied, but it does give you some good pointers for what to look out for and what to avoid.
'Plasma screens don't need to be "topped up with plasma". Your friend is either woefully misinformed or is having you on.'
Plasma TVs used to "wear out" quicker than LCD TVs (though still measurable in tens of thousands of hours of life) so maybe that's where some misunderstandings started off....
Plasma TVs traditionally consume more power but have a wider viewing angle than LCD ones, however LCDs are improving all the time so they might very well have caught up.
The biggest factor in the end is how well made the TV is and how good the insides are, and they're pretty independent of how the screen actually displays the image.
So do check reviews and try to go and see the TV in a shop somewhere to see what you make of it.
go and have a look in currys/comet and see the difference,we bought one last week,
i had seen an LG plasma i liked 42" for £349
there was a sony bravia 40" lcd for £399
there was no contest on picture quality we went for the sony,it is FAB
we got ours in comet,got free screen cleaning kit and 5 years full insurance (inc accidental damage) for price of 3yrs and also got a gorgeous stand for £50 (argos price of the exact same stand is £119.99)
It depends on how much you are willing to pay and how much you value picture quality.
Basically I would still argue that plasma's give better picture quality at the upper end of the scale.
If you want something < 42" in size and like most people just want something decent and will last then LCD is fine.
Most modern LCD's, even the cheap ones won't have the ghosting effect of yesteryear.
I'd say as long as you stick to the known brands like LG/Samsung/Panasonic and if you can stretch to a Sony then you can't really go wrong.
Oh, some of the posters on here helped me decide what TV to buy. Thanks again for your help guys.
We went for a Samsung LED - we compared the LED to LCD and found that the picture was markedly better. We bought this one and it is fab.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now »
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.