Focus 1.8 TDCi
as above please?
ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
Whats the difference between a plasma and an lcd tv?
- Thread starter chrislloyd
- Start date
Loads of differences. Depending on what size you require will determine which to go for.
E.g. up to 40" go for an LCD.
Plasma show better blacks, and show sports / fast moving images better.
LCDs are brighter, better colours, and better for gaming / PC.
Here's a website I've used a few times when comparing:
http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/plasmatvreviews/plasma-vs-lcd.html
E.g. up to 40" go for an LCD.
Plasma show better blacks, and show sports / fast moving images better.
LCDs are brighter, better colours, and better for gaming / PC.
Here's a website I've used a few times when comparing:
http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/plasmatvreviews/plasma-vs-lcd.html
MKIII 138
pretty much spot on.
colours are not mega acurate on either technology. plasma has more acurate colours defined by its better black but they need calibration ISF = £300
moving images smear on LCD i.e games, plasma has no smear and looks better on low-def sources i.e dvd, freeview
sony is a good LCD choice as it has good blacks and acurate colour it really does beat all apart from rival samsungs. spend more than less with this
thats because samsung and sony panels are made in the same factory.......
not had any issue with lcd creating smearing on games, i've not had any problems with gaming on an lcd, the only thing i have seen better on a plasma is low def source things. Samsungs are very good for gaming, they even have a gaming mode so all the settings are geared towards gaming.
Sony even have a 200Hz set out now to combat motion blur like watching football.
The old plasma vs. lcd is an old topic though, you'll never get a straight answer, some people prefer plasma, some lcd, the lcd is the bigger market, has more choice and is improving all the time whereas plasma is pretty static.
Both will be old hat when OLED is released into the mainstream, Samsung already have an LED TV out and LG a 3D one!
B
Brown.
Plasma has a suspended gas that chanes colour when charged between two panels bit like gas filled double glazing windows, lcd has two panels one with crystals when charged emit light/colour the other to stop em moving about.
B
Brown.
Am sure screen burn was the clincher in the olden days as watching the like of sky sports for some time, changing channel and still seeing a faint out line of the emblem in the top left, but having watched my lass's rents 50inch kuro i would seriously consider a plasma after the lcd.
3 x Renaults + Lexus
I just copied and pasted a previous post on this matter....
Someone said Plamsa tech is a bit old now...not really true at all and LCD has been around longer but not in residential displays. The first big screens were PLasma's but they have moved on in the last 10 years.
Well as its my job and I have been fitting top end system for about 9 years I have supplied and fitted 100's of screens LCD & Plamsa I can tell you.
1. LCD are better for smaller screens (kitchens bedrooms) however Sony & Samsung now do a 70" they are lighter, use less power they suffer from motion blur (noticable on sports) more than Plasmas despite 2MS response times and they colour is not normally as good as plasmas. IMO
2. Plasmas are for 32" and above so no small plasmas the picture and colour on most images is better than LCD as they are slightly more sympathetic to most images. But on a PS3 or PC LCD's maybe have the edge.
Plasma dont need a re gas. After about 50,000 hours of use they lose about 50% brightness so from day one the picture will get worse but it unlikley you will notice this for years, they also use about twice the power so they cost more to run.
Also Plasma's get screen burn LCD suffer from image persitance but not as bad as screen burn. Also LCD suffer from dead pixels and bright pixels so if you get one and it has a dead or bright pixel it is a pain. Many manufactures will allow up to a 20 dead pixels on most screens (check the companies return policy on dead pixels)
But the there is not a great deal between the two and the costs are about the same. Go with what you like but remeber many 1080 screen can make most images look worse.
The Best screen in 42+ range is the Pioneer Kuros series 9 (plasma) after this Samsung (LCD or PLASMA;s) I would say have the best range and quality and price. Panasonic/Sony/Sharp is all pretty much the same. Steer clear of cheaper stuff like AOC and other unknown brands.
Sharp have a new range of 46" LCD's coming out in 2 weeks for about £750 and they are good value high spec screen
Dont belive the hype with 5 year warranties they are unsually not onsite and some have an excess and dont cover everything read the small print
But all techs do come to an end and LCD and Plasma will be killed by OLED in 5 years
Someone said Plamsa tech is a bit old now...not really true at all and LCD has been around longer but not in residential displays. The first big screens were PLasma's but they have moved on in the last 10 years.
Well as its my job and I have been fitting top end system for about 9 years I have supplied and fitted 100's of screens LCD & Plamsa I can tell you.
1. LCD are better for smaller screens (kitchens bedrooms) however Sony & Samsung now do a 70" they are lighter, use less power they suffer from motion blur (noticable on sports) more than Plasmas despite 2MS response times and they colour is not normally as good as plasmas. IMO
2. Plasmas are for 32" and above so no small plasmas the picture and colour on most images is better than LCD as they are slightly more sympathetic to most images. But on a PS3 or PC LCD's maybe have the edge.
Plasma dont need a re gas. After about 50,000 hours of use they lose about 50% brightness so from day one the picture will get worse but it unlikley you will notice this for years, they also use about twice the power so they cost more to run.
Also Plasma's get screen burn LCD suffer from image persitance but not as bad as screen burn. Also LCD suffer from dead pixels and bright pixels so if you get one and it has a dead or bright pixel it is a pain. Many manufactures will allow up to a 20 dead pixels on most screens (check the companies return policy on dead pixels)
But the there is not a great deal between the two and the costs are about the same. Go with what you like but remeber many 1080 screen can make most images look worse.
The Best screen in 42+ range is the Pioneer Kuros series 9 (plasma) after this Samsung (LCD or PLASMA;s) I would say have the best range and quality and price. Panasonic/Sony/Sharp is all pretty much the same. Steer clear of cheaper stuff like AOC and other unknown brands.
Sharp have a new range of 46" LCD's coming out in 2 weeks for about £750 and they are good value high spec screen
Dont belive the hype with 5 year warranties they are unsually not onsite and some have an excess and dont cover everything read the small print
But all techs do come to an end and LCD and Plasma will be killed by OLED in 5 years
