Should I stick with LCD or go Plasma?

Also would you guys still recommend a plasma when my parents watch 4:3 content that has logo there for the whole time even during commercials. How is the pixel orbiter?
 
Schrade said:
Do you see the yellow after images on your plasma?

Added video links for examples of what I'm talking about:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV_fXCW2rOM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm63BEhHWUk

*** WARNING *** If you own a plasma and have never seen this before, it's probably better to not look because then you'll forever notice it. Kinda like how if you've never noticed tearing in games before and someone shows you what it is...you'll forever notice it.
Plasma's do have there own type of 'blur' effect (phosphor trails) but its not even remotely this bad and the effect reduces as the phosphors settle in (its worse when the TV is new)

I have to look really for it to notice on my Pioneer and when I do see it the effect it's very subtle vs. what is shown in these videos.

Ive been gaming on CRT's since Atari 2600 so I'd certainly comment if it were an issue lol.
 
JRW said:
My vote would be absolutely Plasma. (Although its a shame they stopped making Pioneer Kuro's!) Ive had my Pioneer for 2 years and it destroys any LCD's Ive seen, especially when it comes to actual ANSI contrast ratio (mine tested 2,700:1),Black levels are to die for plus CRT style viewing angles, Zero gamma shift. No "bleeding" backlights (no backlight PERIOD).

I have my PS3/Wii/360/PC hooked up and its been by far the best TV Ive experienced to date.

Pioneer 5080HD:


Dark room test:
I've got the 5020FD, but im having trouble finding where the 5080HD fit in kuro's timeline, is it an UK model? 8G? 7G?
 
Cold-Steel said:
Did any of you guys end up breaking in your plasmas?

I keep hearing on the AVS forum how you're supposed to avoid gaming for the first 100-200 hours or so and keep the brightness/contrast low.
Yes. Seemed like it took forever, but it was worth it.
 
The Panny G10 42 inch is $750 now.

Agh, I heard it's good except that awful black level bullshit.

What other kinda of plasmas should I look for around the $1000 price range? Everyone just says G10 or Kuro but the Kuro is dead and the G10 is pretty much broken.
 
Odrion said:
The Panny G10 42 inch is $750 now.

Agh, I heard it's good except that awful black level bullshit.

What other kinda of plasmas should I look for around the $1000 price range? Everyone just says G10 or Kuro but the Kuro is dead and the G10 is pretty much broken.
Get Panasonic S1 42 inch right now for 650 dollars now + 50 dollar mail back at Sears... I've read that it does not suffer from the G10 syndrome.
 

commish

Jason Kidd murdered my dog in cold blood!
I had to make this choice a few months ago. After weeks of research (yes, I over-research everything), I settled on an LCD. There's a lot of bs when it comes to plasma/lcd, and I hope the OP checks out some of these tvs with his own eyes before choosing. Online pictures of ppl's tv screens is completely useless. For the record, I bought a Samsung LN52B750.

In the end, tho, I assume most people on here are gonna say that whatever they personally own is better :)
 

dark10x

60 fps 60 fps 60 fps 60 fps 30 fps 60 fps 60 fps 30 fps
Buggy Loop said:
I've got the 5020FD, but im having trouble finding where the 5080HD fit in kuro's timeline, is it an UK model? 8G? 7G?
I had a 5080HD before the 5020FD. The 5080 is part of the 768p HD series while the 5020 is part of the 1080p FD series. The 5080 was the FIRST generation Kuro. The comparable FD was the 5010FD, which was a 1080p first gen Kuro. The second gen Kuro was actually a massive improvement over the first gen.

Panasonic and the like have actually matched the first gen Kuro panels in most areas, but are still well behind the second gen. The first gen is still beautiful, however.
 
I've been looking at Plasmas, but the phosphor lag thing seriously disturbs me. Is this just impossible for the tv companies to fix?
 
commish said:
I had to make this choice a few months ago. After weeks of research (yes, I over-research everything), I settled on an LCD.
Let me guess. You have a bunch of windows in the room that will reflect, or your research skills are abysmal.

*edit: Jett, don't listen to the FUD. The people spreading it are likely paid, or psychologically trying to justify their purchase choices.
 
Buggy Loop said:
I've got the 5020FD, but im having trouble finding where the 5080HD fit in kuro's timeline, is it an UK model? 8G? 7G?
There are two generations of Kuros: 8G (2007) and 9G (2008). 5080 is a 768p 8G Kuro. It's black level is slightly lower (i.e. better) than the 2009 Panasonic NeoPDPs.

This year's Panasonic plasmas (V and G series only) will have black levels better than the 5080, and possibly better than 8G Kuros as a whole. They will not equal the 9G Kuros in black level, though, but they could be quite close indeed. As for 3D, only the V series will have it.
 

commish

Jason Kidd murdered my dog in cold blood!
Cheez-It said:
Let me guess. You have a bunch of windows in the room that will reflect, or your research skills are abysmal.

*edit: Jett, don't listen to the FUD. The people spreading it are likely paid, or psychologically trying to justify their purchase choices.
You're right. Everyone who owns an LCD bought one simply because they don't know any better. It's simply impossible for you to be wrong (congrats on that, by the way), and everyone else is an ignorant peasant.

Ah, I do love the gaming side of gaf :)

The irony of your edit is great, too.
 
commish:

I suppose I do overemphasize the importance of the difference.

Plasma IQ is objectively better than LCD, although situations such as bright, uncontrollable light sources or the need for a set under 40" might be better served with an LCD.

It's worth mentioning that most decent sets with either technology are going to be loved by their owners, and that the differences in the technologies aren't as large as some play them out to be.

I'm curious though... what research lead you to pick LCD? I ask because most knowledgeable people who do the research come to the opposite conclusion.
 
Buggy Loop said:
I've got the 5020FD, but im having trouble finding where the 5080HD fit in kuro's timeline, is it an UK model? 8G? 7G?
It's an 8G 768P model, it will still accept and display 1080i / 1080P signals but converts them to the TV's native 1360x768 resolution. The Bluray shots I posted were with the PS3 set on 1080p.

As for black levels ive always been extremely picky especially with my previous TV being a Sony 34XBR960 HDTV CRT (which I still own) and the 8G black levels more than satisfy even when watching movies in a dark room.

Most current console games run at native 720p or lower resolution anyhow so its no big deal to me, plus Bluray still looks fantastic on it lol.
 
Hey guys im planning to buy a plasma tv.

Please tell me which is the best Plasma Tv(for gaming) i can get for around $1500? There are so many of them..please advise!!
 
If you put a LCD and plasma next to each other you'll see that the plasma has a slight flicker, sometimes as bad as 50hz CRTs. I would be irritated by knowing that, even though I probably wouldn't notice it most of the time. LCDs have silky smooth and stable pictures even though their colours leave a little to be desired.
Black levels I never got all the hoopla about. Any kind of projection system has worse blacklevels than a good LCD. I never hear anyone complain about BL in the cinema...
BL is a relative thing, just like brightness or loudness.
Phosphor lag is really vexing for fast motion or with certain colour combinations. It's a bit like DLP projectors rainbow effect.
 
If I could get a plasma tv, I would. I have my TV in my bed room and 40 inch is probably the largest sized screen I could have here (right now on a 32 inch LCD). From what I've seen, plasma tvs do look better than LCD (thoguht I don't know about the long term since I've only seen it at a friend's house).

By the time I get my next TV, most likely in 2011, I'll see what I'll do. Maybe my living situation will change and I would have more room for a TV, so who knows. I'm still a bit annoyed that the options for flatscreen TV come down to LCD or Plasma (+OLED, LED, w/e...Projector?).

Also, it's surprising to see people down on 3D; you just don't expect to see so many luddites on a forum all about gaming and tech and things like that. It may be more expensive, but if 3D actually does take off and become more meaningful in games, movies or whatever, it's better to be prepared. Average people don't buy TVs that often, and even making a wild assumption that the next console gen will have an increased presence of 3D means you'll miss out on all that. It's also too early to say whether or not you think it's a worthwhile feature or not since most people probably haven't experience gaming in 3D. Though, the importance does change between people, and it won't be as different as playing games on SD vs HDTV this gen. Actually, who knows! maybe Dead Rising 3 on the Xbox 720 will have text that can only be read in 3D.
 
Linkzg said:
Also, it's surprising to see people down on 3D; you just don't expect to see so many luddites on a forum all about gaming and tech and things like that. It may be more expensive, but if 3D actually does take off and become more meaningful in games, movies or whatever, it's better to be prepared.
Avoiding the bleeding edge != luddite.

You will likely pay more, and get first gen tech that won't justify the price difference. Even if we're talking about something that might be standard in upcoming sets, the first gen likely won't be worth waiting for.

Also, where do posters like squeak come from? Maybe LCD is ahead because the masses on average aren't the sharpest people around, and they take bullshit like that seriously.
 
Zapages said:
My question is:

How is the TC-P42S1 as a computer monitor and for areas with bright sun light that changes during the day?

The S series doesn't have VGA input. You need a G for that.

But that said, plasma as a computer monitor is a bad idea. Burn in with television/dvd/game video is pretty much a thing of the past, but you WILL get burn in of your computer desktop with a plasma because there isn't enough change in the elements displayed. If a computer monitor is your goal, LCD is your friend.
 
Cheez-It said:
Avoiding the bleeding edge != luddite.

You will likely pay more, and get first gen tech that won't justify the price difference. Even if we're talking about something that might be standard in upcoming sets, the first gen likely won't be worth waiting for.
What is the alternative? again, this is for an average person. If the guy wants a new TV, and assuming he might wants that 3D content that will show up, the options are: Buy plasma/lcd tv now, then buy 3DTVs the next time around (which is a long time for most people; let's say 5 years)--or wait a few months, get an 3D capable TV for a bit more money. Even if it's the first gen, it will still allow him to get all the potential content between this and his next TV purchase.

And I didn't mean that the people avoiding 3D in TVs are luddites; I was talking about the people who dismiss the tech. Realistically most people haven't even tried 3D gaming since, uh, Rad Racer on the NES. The nvidia solution for PC is really neat and that's just taking games and making them 3D, not games designed to be 3D.

Even ust waiting to see what happens in the coming months is worth it to see if 3D is going to be something you'd want in the future. A lot of this is "maybe" and "potential" talk right now, but who knows if suddenly it becomes something developers want to work with. All we know right now is that, other than the PC, the PS3 is getting 3D gaming in the future. This could just be another failed experiment or something cool; it's too early to tell, but being prepared isn't bad.
 
I love my panny plasma (65v10). Only problem is playing god of war 1 left a little white image retention where the rage of the gods icon was. I'm sure it'll go away in time. I think I just rushed gaming too early (didn't break in the set). And to anyone thinking its because I have an old or low end set, it was panasonic's best screen of 2009.

Edit: fwiw, this set also supports 24p mode (as does ps3) which allows you watch in 24 fps.
 
Squeak said:
If you put a LCD and plasma next to each other you'll see that the plasma has a slight flicker, sometimes as bad as 50hz CRTs. I would be irritated by knowing that, even though I probably wouldn't notice it most of the time. LCDs have silky smooth and stable pictures even though their colours leave a little to be desired.
Flat out wrong FUD. What kind of crappy plasma were you comparing? All the Pioneers or Panasonics I've seen (and that's a lot) don't do this in any kind of perceptible way. If anything, LCD is the tech with the flicker on fast motion, especially. And yes, even the 120Hz sets still have the problem with fast motion displaying poorly. Plasma behaves most like a CRT with smooth motion an no frame judder (unless you're doing 2:3 pulldown with bad compensation, but that's another story).
 
Justin Dailey said:
I love my panny plasma (65v10). Only problem is playing god of war 1 left a little white image retention where the rage of the gods icon was. I'm sure it'll go away in time. I think I just rushed gaming too early (didn't break in the set). And to anyone thinking its because I have an old or low end set, it was panasonic's best screen of 2009.
Mmmm....65V10. We wanted that, but it was on perpetual backorder for months at the time we were buying, so we had to finally settle for the 65S10.

We game a LOT and never had the persistence you're describing. Did you leave the video settings on factory? If you go to the video is is set to VIVID or STANDARD? VIVID is the factory setting and will roast your display. It should be standard with modifications to the brightness, contrast, and other options to make the video closest to natural.

Justin Dailey said:
...it was panasonic's best screen of 2009.
Actually, it was one tier from the top. The Z series was the top of 2009's Panasonic line, but didn't come in a 65". A 54" screen was the max for a Z series.
 
vireland said:
Flat out wrong FUD. What kind of crappy plasma were you comparing? All the Pioneers or Panasonics I've seen (and that's a lot) don't do this in any kind of perceptible way. If anything, LCD is the tech with the flicker on fast motion, especially. And yes, even the 120Hz sets still have the problem with fast motion displaying poorly. Plasma behaves most like a CRT with smooth motion an no frame judder (unless you're doing 2:3 pulldown with bad compensation, but that's another story).
Plasmas are waaaaay smoother than LCDs. From someone who has 3 Samsung LCDs and 1 Panny G15.

Waaay smoother.
 
vireland said:
Flat out wrong FUD. What kind of crappy plasma were you comparing? All the Pioneers or Panasonics I've seen (and that's a lot) don't do this in any kind of perceptible way. If anything, LCD is the tech with the flicker on fast motion, especially. And yes, even the 120Hz sets still have the problem with fast motion displaying poorly. Plasma behaves most like a CRT with smooth motion an no frame judder (unless you're doing 2:3 pulldown with bad compensation, but that's another story).
Fwiw, I can definitely notice a slight flicker on my Dad's 2 year old Panny plasma. Its not as bad as a CRT (which at 50hz would drive me insane) but it was there nonetheless. I'm not talking about judder.
 

commish

Jason Kidd murdered my dog in cold blood!
Cheez-It said:
commish:

I suppose I do overemphasize the importance of the difference.

Plasma IQ is objectively better than LCD, although situations such as bright, uncontrollable light sources or the need for a set under 40" might be better served with an LCD.

It's worth mentioning that most decent sets with either technology are going to be loved by their owners, and that the differences in the technologies aren't as large as some play them out to be.

I'm curious though... what research lead you to pick LCD? I ask because most knowledgeable people who do the research come to the opposite conclusion.
If all you do is just camp on forums like avs, then I understand why you post what you post. Besides reading reviews, user reviews, comparisons, etc on various websites/blogs/forums like everyone else, I went down to my fine local electronics retailer and did a side by side comparison of my top 4 or so choices for each type - lcd/plasma - and then, considering all of the above as well as my apartment, I made my decision. I was THISCLOSE with going with an led tv, but the extra cost wasn't justifiable to me.

And yes, the differences are minor enough that for most people, it won't matter. It's like the idiots who argued for days and months over the P/IQ between hd dvd and blu-ray. It's the internet - people argue that whatever they have is the best, it's only natural.

Of course I would argue against plasma IQ as "objectively better" simply because that's just not possible. That's like saying one painting looks better than another. Sure, by some person's metrics, that's probably true. But what makes an image better for you doesn't mean that's what makes an image better for me. But really, that's not important to argue over.

For the record, two walls of the room that houses my tv are completely floor to ceiling windows :)

I have absolutely nothing against plasma tvs, and when my friends ask me for TV recommendations, based on what their needs and desires, it's often a plasma that I recommend. Great TVs.

The OP asked which he should get, and all I said was that based on my needs and my research, I bought an LCD and that the OP should do some research on his own and see TVs himself. You then go crazy and call my research skills abysmal and that I'm paid to spread these horrendous lies. Seems like you have some issues to work out :) You act as if someone is asking to choose between buying a wii and a ps3 when they want the most graphically impressive game system. The difference isn't that big (tho I guess we could go back to my IQ argument!), so saying that those people who buy LCDs are not the "sharpest people around" is just...childish. But like I said, this is the gaming side of gaf.
 
brain_stew said:
Fwiw, I can definitely notice a slight flicker on my Dad's 2 year old Panny plasma. Its not as bad as a CRT (which at 50hz would drive me insane) but it was there nonetheless. I'm not talking about judder.
Then there's something wrong with the video he's feeding it or the TV. We have various ages of Panny plasmas and none of them do what you're describing.
 
vireland said:
Mmmm....65V10. We wanted that, but it was on perpetual backorder for months at the time we were buying, so we had to finally settle for the 65S10.

We game a LOT and never had the persistence you're describing. Did you leave the video settings on factory? If you go to the video is is set to VIVID or STANDARD? VIVID is the factory setting and will roast your display. It should be standard with modifications to the brightness, contrast, and other options to make the video closest to natural.
No I use the Cnet recommended settings. Nowhere near VIVID
 
commish said:
Of course I would argue against plasma IQ as "objectively better" simply because that's just not possible. That's like saying one painting looks better than another. Sure, by some person's metrics, that's probably true. But what makes an image better for you doesn't mean that's what makes an image better for me. But really, that's not important to argue over.
Good point. I suppose by 'better' I mean more natural / realistic.

In the same sense, you could argue that Bose sound systems aren't objectively worse. Some people prefer that sound.
 
vireland said:
Then there's something wrong with the video he's feeding it or the TV. We have various ages of Panny plasmas and none of them do what you're describing.
No, there's not, it does it on all sources and even in the menu and its not something that would be affected by source material anyway. I'm not surprised you don't notice it, most don't and no one else that has viewed the TV has ever mentioned it but then I've always been very sensitive to flicker. Its worth noting that we're talking about a PAL TV here, so it refreshes @ 50hz which definitely makes a difference.
 
brain_stew said:
No, there's not, it does it on all sources and even in the menu and its not something that would be affected by source material anyway. I'm not surprised you don't notice it, most don't and no one else that has viewed the TV has ever mentioned it but then I've always been very sensitive to flicker. Its worth noting that we're talking about a PAL TV here, so it refreshes @ 50hz which definitely makes a difference.
Ah, PAL! All bets are off, then. You have my condolences.
 
PJX said:
Question about these 3D TVs. Will I have to wear glasses every time or just when a program is in 3D? For instance if I want to play with on 360 or Nintendo Wii, will have to wear the glasses or can I just play them without having to wear the glasses?
3D will be backwards compatible. All 3D stuff (at least in BlueRay and PS3 gamin) will be playable in 2D.
 
Buy a plasma now, and get a 3D enabled tv in 4-5 years when:

a) You know the tech is going to stick or not
b) The TVs have come wayyy down in price
 
brain_stew said:
No, there's not, it does it on all sources and even in the menu and its not something that would be affected by source material anyway. I'm not surprised you don't notice it, most don't and no one else that has viewed the TV has ever mentioned it but then I've always been very sensitive to flicker. Its worth noting that we're talking about a PAL TV here, so it refreshes @ 50hz which definitely makes a difference.
I have heard of people noticing a flicker. It's probably the PAL thing but does the phosphor luminance decay the same way it does on CRT? If that were true we'd notice it also on 60Hz. And why isn't everyone from Europe on avsforum complaining about this issue. Maybe it's some people's eyes being sensitive to some plasma panels.
Cheez-It said:
commish:

I suppose I do overemphasize the importance of the difference.

Plasma IQ is objectively better than LCD, although situations such as bright, uncontrollable light sources or the need for a set under 40" might be better served with an LCD.

It's worth mentioning that most decent sets with either technology are going to be loved by their owners, and that the differences in the technologies aren't as large as some play them out to be.

I'm curious though... what research lead you to pick LCD? I ask because most knowledgeable people who do the research come to the opposite conclusion.
Besides the glare I can also see some people finding plasma picture noise annoying if they often sit really close. Glare and plasma noise does annoy me but LCD's inferior motion resolution and higher input lag for gaming is enough to keep me with plasma.
 
commish said:
In the end, tho, I assume most people on here are gonna say that whatever they personally own is better :)
Except in my case, unless you have the same TV I do, it is actually true and pretty undisputable. :D I can say for a fact that I have the absolute best TV that money can buy :D
 
Not to throw the discussion in a different direction, but I've been extremely happy with my 60inch Mitsubishi DLP. I picked it up Labor Day for $999. Gaming has been great on it and Bluray movies look fantastic. My brother-in-law has an old Fujitsu 40 inch Plasma and CNN is burned in permanently in the lower third of the screen. Size to price ratio played a huge part in my purchasing decision.
 
vireland said:
Mmmm....65V10. We wanted that, but it was on perpetual backorder for months at the time we were buying, so we had to finally settle for the 65S10.

We game a LOT and never had the persistence you're describing. Did you leave the video settings on factory? If you go to the video is is set to VIVID or STANDARD? VIVID is the factory setting and will roast your display. It should be standard with modifications to the brightness, contrast, and other options to make the video closest to natural.



Actually, it was one tier from the top. The Z series was the top of 2009's Panasonic line, but didn't come in a 65". A 54" screen was the max for a Z series.
Wasn't the Z series the same screen/image processer thoguh? Ill look up those cnet settings later when I'm no on my phone
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I don't get how anyone thinks 3D is a gimmick. If you've seen Avatar, then you know that subtle, smart use of 3D makes a film better. I believe the same will be true for games. Yes, we'll have shit filmmakers and designers fuck it up, but we already have games now that use it and look really cool.

Michael Bay says 3D is a fad. Do not agree with Michael Bay.
 

Raistlin

Post Count: 9999
brain_stew said:
Fixed.

If you're buying a high end TV in 2010, then you're buying a 3D TV, whether you want to or not.
Pretty much


jett said:
I've been looking at Plasmas, but the phosphor lag thing seriously disturbs me. Is this just impossible for the tv companies to fix?
On pre-existing TV's? No.

Is it inherent that all plasmas must have this however? No. The new Pana's should not have this at all based on the tech description.
 
vazel said:
I have heard of people noticing a flicker. It's probably the PAL thing but does the phosphor luminance decay the same way it does on CRT? If that were true we'd notice it also on 60Hz. And why isn't everyone from Europe on avsforum complaining about this issue. Maybe it's some people's eyes being sensitive to some plasma panels.
Besides the glare I can also see some people finding plasma picture noise annoying if they often sit really close. Glare and plasma noise does annoy me but LCD's inferior motion resolution and higher input lag for gaming is enough to keep me with plasma.
I can only comment on what I see through my eyes, I don't aim to explain what causes it. like I say, no one else who've used the TV has ever picked up on it, so maybe my eyes are just that bit more sensitive. CRT monitors always looked like strobe lights to me, so its clearly something I notice more than others. Its still a great TV mind, and I'm not suggesting its anything nearly as bad as a PAL CRT (fuck them things! :lol ).
 

Raistlin

Post Count: 9999
yurinka said:
3D will be backwards compatible. All 3D stuff (at least in BlueRay and PS3 gamin) will be playable in 2D.
For gaming, yes ... I can't imagine a company making a 3D-only game (well, other than maybe some PSN stuff).

For movies, well ... from what I've read, technically the spec doesn't enforce it. However, I suspect the vast majority of content will be. I need to read up more on the details (the full spec should be published soon), because I'm a bit confused why it would be an issue at all.
 

Raistlin

Post Count: 9999
vazel said:
I have heard of people noticing a flicker. It's probably the PAL thing but does the phosphor luminance decay the same way it does on CRT? If that were true we'd notice it also on 60Hz. And why isn't everyone from Europe on avsforum complaining about this issue. Maybe it's some people's eyes being sensitive to some plasma panels.
Besides the glare I can also see some people finding plasma picture noise annoying if they often sit really close. Glare and plasma noise does annoy me but LCD's inferior motion resolution and higher input lag for gaming is enough to keep me with plasma.
To my knowledge, the decay is actually faster on plasma. However, the primary colors do not decay at the exact same rate, which leads to the type of trails people note on plasma.

It's a bit different then CRT. On CRT, you'll see a larger trail/ghost ... on plasma the issue is that the trail, while shorter, is actually concentrated in a specific portion of the spectrum for a bit longer. The Red and Green phosphors are the issue here, as they have the longest decay. If you look at a color wheel, you'll realize Red + Green = Yellow ... and that's why the annoying trail people see is generally yellow. Obviously, that's pretty much the worst color to have an after image of, particularly when dealing with high contrast stuff.


The good news is that the new Pana's should not have the issue at all. They've developed new 'fast-decay phosphors' for the Red and Green. They decay in a 1/3 less time than traditional phosphors.




Note: The increase in decay speed is also applicable to 2D. It's simply that going to 3D forced their hand; they needed to find a solution or 3D wouldn't work.

So for all the people concerned that the move to 3D will stagnate improvement in other key IQ areas of the TV, that's not necessarily the case. There is overlap in a lot of things, so in many ways going to 3D will help TV's overall ... particularly when it comes to motion (for both Plasma and LCD).