Hyundai 42" Plasma £444 @ pcworld + del

Anarchist

It really is personal preference. Plasmas do have better image quality, but LCDs are more forgiving of their owners and their colours can be more 'vivid' making them more suited to the kids bedrooms, watching Finding Nemo.

Plasmas have an estimated half life of about 60000 hours these days. If you work that out based on your own viewing it will give you an idea how long it would last (one would last me about 20 years - I'm sure I'll have a new one by then!). This is the length of time it takes for the brightness of a plasma to drop to half of what it started off like - which is still plenty bright enough to watch. Similar to CRTs in this respect.

They do use more energy than CRTs, but 4x as much is a lie. LCD's are a little more efficient, but not that much more.

If you want a decent TV, you do indeed get what you pay for. Prices start from about £1300 (for a Panasonic PX60) for a quality set.

HDTV won't be available to the masses for at least a couple of years. Its not a necessity at the moment but 99% of decent sets available for sale now are HD, so theres no reason not to really.

Crabman

ricflairandy wrote:

this is totally wrong. Do you also belive plasmas need regassing?

That's what I thought or you just buy a new one which is cheaper than regassing

riker71

Why is it that LCD's (dont know about plasma) apart from perhaps Sharp Aquos range are inferior at displaying SD feeds than CRT? This is what puts me off buying, have read so much on AVforums about LCD/Plasma doing great HD pic/dvd/xbox 360 etc but poor quality from SD feed. If it means having to pay £1300 then that rules probably 80% of the general populus out. Until this so called superior technology can display SD as good as or better than CRT Im staying clear.

ukbill69

Anarchist wrote:

You are completely and utterly misinformed.

Plasma is not dying. Most plasma manufacturers (sony excluded) are increasing production of plasmas year on year, this year included. Current technology LCD has not been out as long as current technology Plasma. (ps, they're donkeys). Plasma actually works similar to your old CRT set, its more an evolution really.

I personally own a 42" Phillips 9 series LCD (and have owned a hitachi plasma) not to mention I work with the things most days (ICT for conferencing). Plasmas do have far better image quality unless you're watching cartoons on DVD. More realistic colours, better reproduction of blacks, better contrast.

Both have their advantages. Retention/burn on plasmas can still be an issue (albeit nowhere near the worry most people think, its very uncommon these days besides with these cheap crap hyundais)

The best LCD will NEVER come out 'at a good price'. As poster before has mentioned, there is always something better round the corner, and the best will always command a ridiculously high price just because it is the best.

Look at the Philips ambilight. £3500 for a 42" LCD.

Sony, Samsung, LG and loads others are making more LCD than plasma, why do you think this?, well is becuase of the technology, Plasma has been out longer? ive had a LCD screen for over 10 years and they where out long before I got one. LCD display was invented in 1904 and the first plamsa display was invented in 1964.

georgesky01

scottishchick27 wrote:

No stock in Scotland. Thanks anyway.:cool:

try stirling

Anarchist

ukbill69 wrote:

Sony, Samsung, LG and loads others are making more LCD than plasma, why do you think this?, well is becuase of the technology, Plasma has been out longer? ive had a LCD screen for over 10 years and they where out long before I got one. LCD display was invented in 1904 and the first plamsa display was invented in 1964.

sorry but this,

A) Is absolute garbage, and

Has absolutely nothing to do with anything and makes absolutely no sense at all.

Its pretty obvious that you're one of the misinformed masses that choose to ONLY listen to the tosh that you once read in 'AV for Noobs Monthly' (collect all 26 issues to obtain the parts to build your own lego LCD TV), rather than listening to real life experienced, knowledgeable people that work with these daily.

Neither are better. Each are better for different tasks. IT'S ENTIRELY PERSONAL PREFERENCE

wockawocka

When you compare similarly priced LCD's and Plasmas the LCD's tend to have poor contrast ratios. So..if going cheap go Plasma. Plus LCD's are fixed resolution, Plasma's aren't.

http://www.lcdtvbuyingguide.com/lcdtv-plasmavslcd.shtml

Quote:

' POWER CONSUMPTION

Because LCDs use florescent backlighting to produce images, they require substantially less power to operate than plasmas do. LCD TVs consume about half the power that plasma displays consume. The reason: Plasmas use a lot of electricity to light each and every pixel you see on a screen - even the dark ones. Though plasma manufacturers have improved voltage consumption requirements a plasma TV will consume around a third more power for the same size display.'

Plasma's use up twice the amount of juice CRT's do screen size for screen size, not four times...jesus you'd need a 20amp fuse if they did.

Now shut up both of you

salsa1

What do you think is athe best priced Sony, Panansonic or Samsung TV please?