LCD or Plasma?..what is the difference?!

kwikbreaks

aliEnRIK wrote: »

What do you think happens when watching footy on an LCD screen?

In my case I go to sleep but the same thing happens if I watch it on CRT or Plasma.

I presume he means the problem with fast motion which used to plague LCD TVs but is now largely fixed.

Coveredinbees!!!!

Don't see how the picture quality can be better on an LED TV, it's just an LCD TV with an LED back light?

Snooze

kwikbreaks wrote: »

In my case I go to sleep but the same thing happens if I watch it on CRT or Plasma.

I presume he means the problem with fast motion which used to plague LCD TVs but is now largely fixed.

Indeed, and no it isn't. Anyone that can't see the very obvious motion blur on LCDs (regardless of cost) needs their eyes testing.

aliEnRIK

Snooze wrote: »

:rotfl:

Clueless...

As I use a calibration meter to calibrate tvs, id rather say im NOT clueless. In fact I put it to you I know FAR more about tvs than you do.

But hey, thats the response of someone whos backs to the wall and they cant come out with anything better

(Motion blur? no, my picture in the world cup was 'rock solid'. What are we saying here? That LCDs have a cr*p picture ~ the end? Because THATS technical )

weegie.geek

And this is what happens every time there's a plasma/lcd discussion.

Coveredinbees!!!! wrote: »

Don't see how the picture quality can be better on an LED TV, it's just an LCD TV with an LED back light?

nope, that's a LCD tv with an LED backlight. LED TVs are different beasts entirely. Either way, a decent LED backlit set will give better contrast than a standard lcd set.

James123_2

My rather limited understanding regarding these two technologies was always that LCD sets were best suited to small to medium-sized sets and that plasma was more readily able to cope with larger images. The John Lewis guy once explained that LCD was superior to plasma, but only up to a certain size point after which plasma came into its own. Hence the reason why plasmas only start at 37" and LCD TV sets disappear (I believe) at 40". As ever, I'm happy to be wrong.

aliEnRIK

heres a nice little LCD 'motion blur' test that was done
Ill point you to the conclusion ~
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2356411,00.asp

"The participants' conclusions were consistent across the board and will likely surprise most people: There was essentially no visually detectable motion blur on any of the LCD HDTVs, regardless of whether they had 60- or 120-Hz refresh rates, strobed LED backlighting, or advanced motion enhancement processing. When viewers thought they saw motion blur, with only a handful of minor exceptions, the blur was either in the source video or a temporary visual illusion that disappeared when we reviewed the segments in question"

gonzo127

weegie.geek wrote: »

And this is what happens every time there's a plasma/lcd discussion.



nope, that's a LCD tv with an LED backlight. LED TVs are different beasts entirely. Either way, a decent LED backlit set will give better contrast than a standard lcd set.

i didnt know they had made a full LED tv i just thought all the ones advertised where just a LCD with a LED backlight, cna you point me in the direction of some info on a full LED tv please as i would liek to read up on them

aliEnRIK

James123 wrote: »

My rather limited understanding regarding these two technologies was always that LCD sets were best suited to small to medium-sized sets and that plasma was more readily able to cope with larger images. The John Lewis guy once explained that LCD was superior to plasma, but only up to a certain size point after which plasma came into its own. Hence the reason why plasmas only start at 37" and LCD TV sets disappear (I believe) at 40". As ever, I'm happy to be wrong.

That used to be true, the real figure is now around 50" where the split is

James123_2

Thanks ... as ever!