Flat Screen TV shopping

[seigezunt]

In a similar vein to the Blu-Ray thread, I'm asking for advice on buying a flat-screen TV.

I recently became a father, and my mother wants to give us a flat screen as a present, and wants us to pick it out.

I know next to nothing about the things, having last bought a new TV some time in the 1980s.

So I read the Consumer Reports latest update from March, and I thought I had it narrowed down to a Samsung 42-inche plasma.

But looking around, my local stores only have LCDs.

I'm unclear as to the difference.


Plans are to wall-mount it in the corner of the living room. The plan is eventually to hook to bluray. but do dvd for now. We don't have cable, only watch movies, and the four channels we can get over the air.

Tech-heads, any advice?

 

[Mr. B]

Plasma and LCD are different display technologies. Plasma sets excite gases with electricity to generate light in each pixel segment. LCDs selectively block light from a backlight to display specific colors.

Generally plasma sets look a little better and have darker, deeper blacks but consume more electricity. I prefer plasma sets but they do typically have glossy screens prone to glare so room lighting and windows in relation to the TV location is more of a factor.

LCDs are as you have seen the more common option and there are plenty of good LCD sets and their black levels have improved significantly in the last 2 years. Most consumers aren't that particular about image quality and are easily wooed by whatever television looks brightest in the store.

 

[The Fatman]

Traditionally, as Mr. B said, you get the absolute best picture quality with a Plasma set. However, they do have higher energy costs, generate a LOT of heat, have a horrific problem with screen burn in (basically, you really can't use a plasma set for gaming), and most damningly, also have a problem with bleaching (where the picture becomes very noticeably faded after so many hours of use). In the first couple generations of Plasma sets, it was as little as 2 years before you had severe color loss.

LCD has a few variations to look for. Right now, you can have DLP, traditional backlighting, and LED backlighting. All have their own drawbacks. DLP has great quality, but can't be wall mounted, it's too big. Traditional backlighting has a problem with blacks and (on cheaper models) poor viewing angle. LED backlit units are generally very expensive.

All that said, despite the picture quality, I wouldn't buy Plasma. Most major manufacturers are discontinuing them as the drawbacks make it just not worth it. That, and I do gaming on mine (Wii and PS3) so that kinda makes up my decision for me.

If money isn't an issue, find an LED LCD and enjoy years of amazing quality from your unit. Otherwise, if you're decide to stick with traditional LCD, remember that refresh rate and contrast ratio are the important numbers (the human eye really can't tell the difference between 1080 and 720 until you're in the 50" range). In both categories, the higher the better.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

My Samsung 40" 1080p is doing quite well after 1.5 years (don't watch it a lot though, more on the weekends). It generates some heat, but I don't know how much compared to the plasma mentioned above.
It also has a glossy screen, compared to the more matte one on my computer monitor.
It has the 120Hz refresh rate, which is supposed to help reduce motion blur that can occur on any flat panel TV.

 

[msbae]

Plasmas burn out fairly quickly in their service life. All manufacturers give TV repairmen the runaround these days but, Samsung is one of the more infamous.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

If all you do is watch broadcast and cable, don't worry about the expense of 1080p sets, nobody broadcasts that. The highest resolution broadcast is
1080i.

If you're planning on a Blu-Ray purchase, 1080p would be worth considering.

 

[Irishman]

However, they do have higher energy costs, generate a LOT of heat, have a horrific problem with screen burn in (basically, you really can't use a plasma set for gaming), and most damningly, also have a problem with bleaching (where the picture becomes very noticeably faded after so many hours of use). In the first couple generations of Plasma sets, it was as little as 2 years before you had severe color loss.

Foley, I know you mean well, but your recommendations are so many years out of date it's actually harmful!

Horrific problems with screen burn in? When was the last time you gamed with a plasma?? 1999?

It is now statistically easier to burn-in a CRT (tube) tv than a new plasma tv. Games look better on plasma due to their better motion handling, superior color, deeper blacks.

Bleaching?? Huh? Not a problem. Hasn't been a problem with sets built in the past 2-3 years. The lifespan of current plasmas assumes you watch 7 hrs per day for 365 days per year, and they take 26 years to lose half their brightness.

Plus, as you go up in size, it's actually cheaper to buy a plasma than an LCD. For example, a 50" Panasonic G10 hovers around $1200-$1300! That's the tv that noone has had a bad thing to say about in professional reviews. It has the brightness that LCDs are known for, plus most of the advantages plasmas have. a 52" LCD with similar performance will cost you over $2000!

DLPs are dying. Only Mitz sells them anymore.

Pioneer is getting out of the TV business because they've been losing money over at least the past 5 years, not because there's something wrong with the technology. Pioneer Elite plasma tvs are THE reference standard, the stick by which all other sets are measured. Even now reviewers are test-floating new sets as "the new Pioneer Elite"? Vizio is getting out of the plasma business, that's true, but for them it was never more than a side-line anyway. Vizio is a value brand, and in looking to reduce costs (which you have to do if you're a value brand, at the expense of all else), they had to eliminate what was, for them, a secondary manufacturing arm. They were looking to simplify in the small to mid-size of the market. Plasmas dominate only the large end of the market at the moment.

but seriously, if you don't have a LOT of sunlight coming into your room, I'd buy the Panasonic 42" x1 and let that be it. You can get it for under $700 quite easily.

 

[Mr. B]

If all you do is watch broadcast and cable, don't worry about the expense of 1080p sets, nobody broadcasts that. The highest resolution broadcast is
1080i.

These days you need a 1080p set to see a 1080i signal without resampling.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

Not gonna improve the view, the source is still interlaced.

 

[seigezunt]

what's a DLP?

and what's 1080i refer to? (that is, why not a p?)


and for more info, I'm not a gamer, but am curious about hooking to computer, maybe.

It would be mostly for dvds and a little broadcast. No cable.

 

[JustAFriend]

I couldn't stand the thought of putting a plasma heater on my wall; my air conditioning runs enough here in Florida.

I got a 47" Philips LCD and have been VERY happy with it (except that the price has come down 30% since last year...)

 

[seigezunt]

I'm surprised to hear that people aren't happy with Samsung. They were the tops in the Consumer reports thingy...

 

[Mr. B]

Not gonna improve the view, the source is still interlaced.

I couldn't disagree more. Even broadcast 1080i is visibly far superior to 720p for example. 1080i from a source such as blu-ray or HD-DVD is difficult for most to distinguish from 1080p.

 

[Mr. B]

what's a DLP?

and what's 1080i refer to? (that is, why not a p?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Light_Processing

1080i and 1080p are both HD video formats sized 1920 × 1080 (2.07 megapixels). Both typically refresh at 60hx but interlaced singles only refresh even or odd lines with each frame which halves the bandwidth required for transmission... just as analog TVs worked. 1080p refreshes every pixel with each frame.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

I couldn't disagree more. Even broadcast 1080i is visibly far superior to 720p for example. 1080i from a source such as blu-ray or HD-DVD is difficult for most to distinguish from 1080p.

Of course. Compare apples and apples. 1080p would look better than 1080i, but nobody is broadcasting it. Either 1080 would look better than either 720, because there are more pixels.

...but it's not like you can tell your TV station which one to broadcast. NBC and CBS are 1080i, ABC is 720p.

 

[Irishman]

Not gonna improve the view, the source is still interlaced.

I couldn't disagree more. Even broadcast 1080i is visibly far superior to 720p for example. 1080i from a source such as blu-ray or HD-DVD is difficult for most to distinguish from 1080p.

Difficult depends, of course, upon the eyes of the beholder. Straight 1080i (just like straight 480i) is easy to spot. Flicker, loss of brightness, are signs you're looking at an interlaced signal. Now, De-interlacing is a feature that some HD media players have, and fewer TVs can do properly. I guess my tv spoils me because it can de-interlace properly, which does away with most issues of a 1080i signal. Most.

 

[FordSVT]

I'm surprised to hear that people aren't happy with Samsung. They were the tops in the Consumer reports thingy...

??? The post referred to a service issue....

As far as I know, Samsung LCDs are some of the best looking TVs on the market for the price. They aren't cheap but you often have to pay quite a bit more for comparable performance with some other mainstream brands like Sony and Panasonic. Just from what I've read and seen in stores.

 

[Mr. B]

...but it's not like you can tell your TV station which one to broadcast. NBC and CBS are 1080i, ABC is 720p.

It's a shame too, ABC and Fox look like crap compared to the NBC and CBS over-the-air broadcasts.

@FordSVT - I would agree Samsung makes good stuff. I have one of their LCD TVs and I love it. Their newer stuff I see in stores is also quite compelling.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

MrB, yeah but it's a tradeoff. 1080i looks better, but the 720p guys can squeeze more subchannels out of their 19 Mbit transport stream than the 1080i guys. More subchannels = more commericals!! It's all about the revenue!

AG, wishing it was quality over quantity when it comes to TV programming.

 

[Irishman]

MrB, yeah but it's a tradeoff. 1080i looks better, but the 720p guys can squeeze more subchannels out of their 19 Mbit transport stream than the 1080i guys. More subchannels = more commericals!! It's all about the revenue!

AG, wishing it was quality over quantity when it comes to TV programming.

1080i does not look better. ABC Sports and ESPN Sports keeps winning awards for having the best HD Sports signal. And they are 720p!