# LCD Vs Plasma



## Major Audi Parts Guru (May 7, 2002)

LCD vs Plasma

Guys and Gals,

Opinions please as to what's best to go for, especially as HD TV is just around the corner

What are the pro's and con's of both


----------



## g-boy (Jun 3, 2005)

if you get a very good plasma (ie 2k plus) it will be better than most LCD's.

LCD's have inherent faults.

to be honest, if i was to choose again i'd probably get a rear projection. they are getting thinner and lighter and the picture is


----------



## kwaTTro (Jul 5, 2005)

I got a 50" Sony rear projection lcd tv about 5/6 yrs ago - still amazing quality

can't comment on the newer lcd or plasma's though - but i think brands do play a BIG part in picture quality - Sony is superb in my experience


----------



## g-boy (Jun 3, 2005)

but LCD's are lighter and are generally better for home use.

plasmas are just sexier imho. contrast ratios for lcd's still lag behind plasma.

but apparantly LCD is the future...


----------



## Major Audi Parts Guru (May 7, 2002)

g-boy said:


> but apparantly LCD is the future...


This is what I've heard too 8)


----------



## g-boy (Jun 3, 2005)

see http://asia.cnet.com/reviews/home_av/tvs/0,39037594,39169380,00.htm

for a balanced debate


----------



## ObiWan (Sep 25, 2005)

We have three LCD's - cannot fault them although they, like Plasma, have a limited shelf life. I don't care about that though because who want to be looking at the same thing 10 years after it was bought anyway. LCD for for us until something better than plasma comes out as an alternative.


----------



## snaxo (May 31, 2002)

The first time I have been blown away by a Plasma or LCD is when I saw the Panasonic TH42PV500 in the Panasonic Shop in Guildford.

I only walked in the shop as I was passing and when I came out I had a new expensive item on my 'want' list.

Stunning picture (until now been disctincly underwhelmed by Plasma / LCD).
It was also a thing of beauty (well, in terms of telly's at least!)

Damian


----------



## ratty (May 18, 2004)

ObiWan said:


> We have three LCD's - cannot fault them although they, like Plasma, have a limited shelf life. I don't care about that though because who want to be looking at the same thing 10 years after it was bought anyway. LCD for for us until something better than plasma comes out as an alternative.


LCDs generally have a life expectancy of about 60k hours which I think in practical terms equates to about 8 hour continuous use for 10 years (unless you are unlucky of course).


----------



## nellsey (Nov 16, 2004)

Looking into the same recently and was told by more than one salesman that the lcd was far more reliable with a longer life expectancy than the plasma.


----------



## ObiWan (Sep 25, 2005)

ratty said:


> ObiWan said:
> 
> 
> > We have three LCD's - cannot fault them although they, like Plasma, have a limited shelf life. I don't care about that though because who want to be looking at the same thing 10 years after it was bought anyway. LCD for for us until something better than plasma comes out as an alternative.
> ...


Thats 5 years years longer than i understood. I will get the paperwork out and check again??? We have all Panasonics?


----------



## Neil (May 7, 2002)

kwaTTro said:


> Sony is superb in my experience


Don't know an awful lot about the whole LCD vs Plasma debate, but I was in John Lewis yesterday, and a lot of the pictures on the big (32"-42") screens didn't look too sharp to me, but they had a Sony LCD 40" that just looked fantastic - brilliant picture, and a very good looking TV as well. OK, it was about Â£2400, but really looked the business, and IMHO well worth the premium over some of the other sets they had.


----------



## jonah (Aug 17, 2002)

IMO it all depends on what size screen you want, anything 42in or above i would go Plasma below LCD, both have fors and against and TBH you won't get a straight answer as owners always recomend what they have.
HD ready doesn't mean High definition, just means it can desplay HD transmisions.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong but true HD is 1080 most HD ready screens run at 1080i or 720 which is inferior but also a better than most pics.
I can honestly say the pic on my Panasonic PW6 knocks spots off 80% of HD ready screens i've viewed so be carefull.
have alook at the 
av-forum

Oh and there's a new one coming which knocks spots off both Plasma and LCD :wink:


----------



## ratty (May 18, 2004)

ObiWan said:


> ratty said:
> 
> 
> > ObiWan said:
> ...


http://asia.cnet.com/reviews/home_av/tv ... 380,00.htm

Quote:
Life span, the number of viewing hours a television provides before dimming to half brightness, is one of the biggest advantages LCD has over plasma. Though the numbers vary among the different brands, plasma displays generally offer around 20,000 hours, while LCD sets last for up to 50,000 hours.

I'll check mine in 10 years :lol:


----------



## ObiWan (Sep 25, 2005)

ratty said:


> ObiWan said:
> 
> 
> > ratty said:
> ...


 :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## CH_Peter (May 16, 2002)

20,000 hours not enough? Even if you watch 8 hours a day, every day, it'd still be 6-7 years before you had to replace it. And who keeps a TV that long before they want something new?


----------



## Ventura (Sep 7, 2005)

If your buying a screen > 37" then you only really have the option of buying a plasma screen.

Bought myself one of these last week:

http://www.pioneer.co.uk/uk/product_detail.jsp?product_id=11144&taxonomy_id=62-63

and the picture is amazing, especially when using the XBOX 360 in 720p mode.


----------



## coupe-sport (May 7, 2002)

> The first time I have been blown away by a Plasma or LCD is when I saw the Panasonic TH42PV500 in the Panasonic Shop in Guildford.


Agreed - lovely looking design too. Just needs a n-vi underneath :wink:

What h-fi has a high def guide out - not one of my normal reads - but worth a look for reviews on the latest plasmas etc. The panasonic is well regarded there too.


----------

