LED or Plasma?

[Emher]

I went with Plasma, a Panasonic TX-P46ST32Y 46 inch. We decided pretty quickly on that after we tested some Soul Calibur V and didn't notice any lag at all and I played bits and pieces from Tron: Legacy and was very impressed by the image quality. The movie looked the best since I'd seen it theaters. Pretty nice user interface, and all that I have to do now is calibrate it and my media PC properly.

Thanks for all the input

 

[Kemaiku]

My parents got themselves an LG 32" LED back in 2009 and it's working as perfectly now as it did out of the box.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

I played bits and pieces from Tron: Legacy and was very impressed by the image quality. The movie looked the best since I'd seen it theaters.

Tron Legacy looked awesome on my plasma. That's actually a very good choice of movie to test it out too because of the contrast between the glowing elements and the deep blacks, which look great in plasma.

 

[Emher]

^Yeah, that's what I figured as well. Did also look at some of the regular film portions of the movie just to make sure, and they looked amazing also.

 

[MANT!]

Have 3 LCD TVs..
42" CFL in the living room, a 32" LED in the master bedroom and a 27" CFL in the guest room. All look fantastic with a good HD picture..and are excellent Blu-ray monitors..

and my power bill for all three is less than my old CRT HDTV (now provided to my kids)

 

[Sparky]

In general a plasma will give better black levels and contrast ratio. The biggest question you should be asking yourself is what environment are you going to be using it in. Plasmas are better suited for environments with minimal light sources. The glass front can produce some nasty reflections and can be difficult to watch in a bright room. If you have a dedicated room with minimal sunlight and controllable lighting then I say plasma all the way. If the room is exposed to direct sunlight, and you will be using the tv during the day, then the led panel might be the better choice.

 

[Haggis and tatties]

Have 3 LCD TVs..
42" CFL in the living room, a 32" LED in the master bedroom and a 27" CFL in the guest room. All look fantastic with a good HD picture..and are excellent Blu-ray monitors..

and my power bill for all three is less than my old CRT HDTV (now provided to my kids)

Your not wrong there, i remember my leccy bill coming in after i got rid of my two old 32in in widescreen CRT TV, and it was quite a drop....similar thing happened when i got rid the old phat Ps3 for one of those new slim models....i again saw a drop in my bill.

Better in my pocket than their's.

 

[MacLeod]

Contrast ratio can also depend on the exact model. A high end LED TV could give better contrast ration than a low end plasma.

Though my LED TV had a higher contrast ratio than some Plasma TV's I was looking it.

 

[cooleddie74]

32" LED screen and I'm pretty satisfied with it. Sometimes I get a desire to get a much bigger set, but I don't necessarily need a larger screen.

 

[marillion]

And then there's this to add to the mix:
Organic Light Emitting Diode TVs

Not horribly common yet, but from what I've seen in demos, the picture is so real, it's almost kind of creepy.. Also, I've heard from more than a couple people that movies and shows with a lot of CGI suffer.. Seems the quality of the picture is so high that the fakeness of the CGI really stands out.

 

[iguana_tonante]

I still don't have a tv set since I moved about one year ago. I don't watch regular tv, I only rarely play a DVD (and it's usually only for background), and I don't mind watching tv series on my laptop. I am sure I will get it some day, but I don't really feel the need for it. I guess I am weird.

 

[Gary7]

Each has their own advantages and disadvantages. Overall, LCD will meet the needs of most people over plasma, and cost less in the long run. But, the plasma technology advantages may have an overriding appeal to some people.

Plasma PROS: Better contrast ratio, better ability to render deep blacks, more color depth, better motion tracking (response time), and more availability in very large screen sizes.

Plasma CONS: more susceptible to burn-in (although this is not as much of a factor now, due to technology improvements, such as "pixel orbiting"), more heat generation (as well as more power consumption, like 2-3 times that of LCD), does not perform as well at higher altitudes, naturally darker image and screen glare in brightly lit rooms, heavier weight, more delicate to ship, and harder to find in sizes less than 42".

LED/LCD PROS: no burn-in susceptibility, cooler running temperature, less screen glare, more functional at high altitudes, longer display life (although improvements are being made in Plasma screen life), looks better in brightly lit rooms due to the ability to produce a naturally brighter image, and less power consumption than Plasma.

LED/LCD CONS: Lower contrast ratio, not as good rendering deep blacks, has a narrower side-to-side viewing angle, and not as good at tracking motion (although this is improving, especially with the implementation of 120Hz refresh rates (and some now offer 240Hz on higher-end models). LED units will generally cost a little more than LCD and plasma, but the power savings over plasma will eventually render the difference moot.


Ultimately, the best thing to do is visit a store and witness the same movie being played on a variety of screens. This will help significantly in making a decision.

Personally, I don't like the fact that Plasma TV's are much heavier and more fragile, which presents a problem when moving or changing a room layout. Plus, their power consumption is quite a bit more (2-3 times that of LCD), as well as generating a lot of heat. LED/LCD is a more "green" technology.

Some links:
Difference between LCD, LED and Plasma TV's
Should I buy LCD or Plasma? (About.com).
TV power consumption chart

 

[cooleddie74]

Agreed on LEDs being energy efficient. I can run my set nonstop for what seems like ages and I barely notice an uptick on my power bill. Compared to older TV technology an LED set might as well not even be plugged in.

 

[Saturn0660]

Be careful there.. You can in fact burn in an LCD or LED/LCD hdtv. Much harder to do but it can be done. Heck the POS register at work has burn in all over it.

Plus as far as power goes. i'd say closer to equal up to maybe twice the power use for a plasma. Of course the uptake on this is a much better pic.

 

[Scout101]

Honestly, a good chunk of what you listed is just old news. Been a lot of that in this thread, people just posting stuff they heard once, or remember from a way earlier generation of the product they're trying to describe. Plasma burn-in, for example. Still technically possible, but not exactly an issue anyone watching a couple hours of tv a night is ever gonna see. Went through the LED cons, as that seemed the worst of your list.

LED/LCD CONS:
Lower contrast ratio

They're sitting anywhere between 5,000,000:1 and 10,000,000:1 right now, lower compared to what? Tough to compare, they all use different measurements to say theirs is the best, but pretty safe to say that it's improved significantly from earlier generations.

not as good rendering deep blacks

Debateable, but sure, Plasmas might still have a small edge. Not as big as it was, though. More a technical thing anyway at this point, as I'm not sure you could tell a ton of difference with the eye test. If you've only got one tv or the other in front of you, you'll think they both look great.

has a narrower side-to-side viewing angle

Compared to what? LED and even older plain LCD tvs have 178 degree viewing angles. If you need more than that, you're completely beside it, and can only see the bezel. Can Plasmas be watched from BEHIND the tv or something?

and not as good at tracking motion (although this is improving, especially with the implementation of 120Hz refresh rates (and some now offer 240Hz on higher-end models).

Yeah, think this one's pretty close to a non-factor. True a few years ago, but not anymore. 120 and 240 hz, plus the software doing it's own thing (think the 'soap opera effect') means you're pretty much getting it all. And in some cases, it's even making up stuff inbetween.

 

[MacLeod]

Go compare them in a shop, as I said earlier when I did on the ones I saw LED TV's had the best blacks folloowed by Plasma and then LCD.

But it comes down to the exact specs and models.

 

[Gary7]

I didn't quantify anything, just made general comparative statements that are widely accepted as being true. But yes, the gap between plasma and LED has been closing gradually. It looks like a lot of it depends upon the amount of money you want to spend. While plasma has long been known for having the deepest blacks, a very high quality LED can look very black, plenty enough for even the more discriminating viewer. As for side angle viewing, there is the matter of image "drop off" that is gradual up until the image is lost. This only matters if you have a certain number of simultaneous viewers. Plasma is still a little better with this.

Plasma is still a very watchable technology, but for the price point and other factors, LED seems to be the better choice these days if you're looking to buy a new TV.

 

[Scout101]

'widely accepted as being true' doesn't really give you much, though. Combination of outdated info and/or things not based in reality to begin with.

For example, my LCD tv dates back to 2007, and I just stood at almost 180 degrees to the screen. No issues with color or picture. Only picture issue was from that fact that you're trying to see a screen through an extremely small amount of visible display, and you can mostly only see the bezel. Not a function of the technology, it's geometry. I'd imagine that a tv 5+ years newer than mine wouldn't have MORE of a problem with that. If they're both good from even 150+ degrees around, you can't sit much more off than that and still see it anyway.

Not really trying to pick a fight, and don't disagree with most of what you said, just pointing out you're putting out stuff that's "generally accepted as true", but either outdated or never really applied/mattered in the first place.

Everyone's eyes (and room situation/layout) are different, so really a matter of finding one that makes you happy and you can afford. If you're happy with that, it's not the wrong choice. Unless you bought a shitty brand that doesn't last long. Along those lines, Panasonic for Plasma and Samsung for LCD/LED definitely appear to be the best, or at least the best bang for your buck. Can probably find better in either type, but the price increase compared to the cost increase won't be worth it.

Annoyed with how cheap these have become. Was checking out a new one, toying with getting a new 55" for the living room, and the cost of that is about half (for a high-end one) of what I paid for my middle of the road model in '07, and that was only 46". Early adopter penalty, I suppose...

 

[Mr. B]

They're sitting anywhere between 5,000,000:1 and 10,000,000:1 right now, lower compared to what?

Those absurd figures are probably dynamic contract ratio, longhand for BS.

Be careful there.. You can in fact burn in an LCD or LED/LCD hdtv. Much harder to do but it can be done. Heck the POS register at work has burn in all over it.

Quite true. The newsroom TV's at the station I work at all have station bugs burned in (not that you'll be using one like that.)

Just yesterday I noticed some mild burn in on my second LCD monitor. My music player is always in the same place on screen so there was a mark where the top corner of the window is, but half an hour of JScreenFix got rid of it.

For example, my LCD tv dates back to 2007, and I just stood at almost 180 degrees to the screen. No issues with color or picture. Only picture issue was from that fact that you're trying to see a screen through an extremely small amount of visible display, and you can mostly only see the bezel.

This relates to the type of TFT LCD panel in use. Twisted nematic (TN) screens have notoriously lousy viewing angles whereas IPS panels are much better, and generally have better color reproduction too.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Is there anything to the notion that any refresh rate above 120Hz is really not worth it? That's what I keep hearing. 120 is good, but anything more is not needed. Can anyone here confirm?

I don't think this has anything to do with the weird-out "soap opera effect", I only see that on certain set brands and I think it's a different effect.