TV Types

[Browncoat]

Not sure where exactly this post belongs so i'll just post it here and it can moved where appropriate if needed..

I'm going to be on the market for a nice large screen soon(around 55") and i'm wondering what you guys think the best value/quality for money TV types are? Feel free to suggest particular models.

Whats the consensus on these new "led" TVs? they look to produce a brighter, more colourful picture but they are much more expensive.

Is there any new tech on the way that I should really wait for? considering this screen will probably have to last for quite a while before I can buy again.

Thanks peoples.

[jagabo]

"Brighter" isn't usually an issue. Unless you're watching in a greenhouse at noon you won't be using the TV at full brightness. Our Samsung 4660 LCD HDTV is usually running with the backlight set at 2 or 3. The max is 10.

"More colorful" isn't necessarily better either. What you want is a TV that can accurately reproduce the source. Not one that makes it more colorful.

Both these issues are tricks used on the showroom floor. Manufacturers know that given multiple displays most people will gravitate toward the brighter, higher contrast, more colorful one -- even if the display is too bright for normal viewing, has too much contrast (crushed black and whites), and is over saturated. So the default settings are usually not suitable for home viewing.

ExtremeTech ran a story comparing LCD and Plasma technologies a few months ago. I summarized some of the findings and gave a link to the original story:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2349236,00.asp

I don't know if they ever ran part 2 of the story. It's important to note that you can't trust manufacturers numbers on things like viewing angles, contrast ratios, and response times. The article explains why.

Even though plasma does have the edge we decided to go with LCD because of the lower power consumption (about 100 watts at our usual setting), the fact that off axis viewing wasn't too important for our purposes, the other LCD problems weren't so bad as to rule them out for us, and the fact that a similar sized 1080p plasma cost a lot more then (a few years ago). But if you're really picky about image quality an expensive plasma is the way to go.

Related articles: http://www.displaymate.com/shootout.html

[Browncoat]

Thanks jagabo!

Wealth of information there! Now to set aside a good chunk of time and process it all

[jman98]

Is there any new tech on the way that I should really wait for? considering this screen will probably have to last for quite a while before I can buy again.

Thanks peoples.

In my opinion many of the objections in the past on LCD TVs are no longer valid. If you need the TV to last for quite a while, then you need to skip plasma and go with LCD. Plasma TVs are not expected to last as long as LCD TVs according to the projected longevity numbers I've seen.

LED seems to be the next big thing, but as you said in your post it's quite expensive and in my opinion not really worth the cost at this time. Perhaps in 3-5 years costs will be down quite a bit and it will be worth considering.

[redsandvb]

Whats the consensus on these new "led" TVs? they look to produce a brighter, more colourful picture but they are much more expensive.

Those LED lit LCD TVs come in two flavors, backlit and edgelit. Backlit ones are supposed to have a better picture vs edgelit. If you can afford one of those, i think you'll be happy with it for sure. In fact, maybe you can find a Sony 55 or 46XBR8 at a good price these days. Maybe a Samsung A950? Their newer B8500 series is supposed to be out or coming out...
They're big buck$ like you said, though...

[edDV]

While the LED backlit LCDs are currently more expensive, they also consume much less power than a fluorescent backlight LCD and in my experience with both HDTV and computer LCD monitors, it is the fluorescent backlight or DC to AC inverter that are most likely to fail mid life. There isn't enough reliability data yet on the LED backlight models but in theory, they should be better since they run on DC power.

Calculate the power consumption using your local power rate and see how that balances against purchase price. Remember if you use air conditioning, you should multiply TV wattage by about 2.5x since the A/C needs to use energy to expel the heat. This is where plasmas are at a disadvantage. They run very hot, especially the 1080p models. Plasma panel power consumption scales by pixels where LCD panel power scales by area.

[Browncoat]

I read through all the information in the links jagabo provided and it all seems to point towards LCoS TV as being where its all at. LCD seems to perform poorly when viewed at anything other than directly in front. Plasma looks to be the next best thing to LCoS but they are susceptable to the dreaded image retention or "burn in" problems and greater power consumption.

CRT seems to be better than LCD and Plasma and very close to LCoS. why did we ever move away from CRT? just a size issue?

Its all very confusing.. all have pros and cons.. It would be nice if there was a distinctive winner.

[edDV]

I read through all the information in the links jagabo provided and it all seems to point towards LCoS TV as being where its all at. LCD seems to perform poorly when viewed at anything other than directly in front. Plasma looks to be the next best thing to LCoS but they are susceptable to the dreaded image retention or "burn in" problems and greater power consumption.

CRT seems to be better than LCD and Plasma and very close to LCoS. why did we ever move away from CRT? just a size issue?

Its all very confusing.. all have pros and cons.. It would be nice if there was a distinctive winner.

HD CRT were great up to about 30 inches but larger sets became extremely heavy and impractical.

The plasma burn in issue is greatly reduced. They use tricks like very slowly moving the image in circles. That leaves power comsumption.

New generation LCD have a much wider range of view. Check it out in the store. LCD also had problems with slow refresh. That too is much improved.

LCoS is a projection technology which is a different set of pro/con.

Check them out in stores. Try to find a high end showroom to see them at their best.

[kimco52]

At work (TV station) we have all types and use them all. Thank goodness for that. It cost me nothing to get real application data. We use LCD computer monitors and if you aren't straight on, it is not good. We also have LCD TV's for monitoring off air and here again, you need to be looking straight on. Some are mounted high and tilted to downward to the viewing position. But when you stand, it isn't great.
We use both LCD and Plasma on our sets and these are not cheap models. Particularly for backgrounds on news set that are used on-air. Our experience is that the large plasmas don't last long without problems. All our monitors/sets are on 24/7. We need to keep spare plasma sets because they are not as reliable. Perhaps there are some newer better ones but they are not cheap.

At home, I use CRT's for my computers. I prefer them. My HD TV is a rear screen CRT projection one and I have no reason to replace it. It is a 65 inch Mitsubishi with great picture. Yes, it is big, and heavy...385 pounds. But it looks natural and good at any angle in the room and with any ambient light. Only problem would be at certain hours of the afternoon when direct sunlight would hit it through the patio door but turning the vertical blinds will block the direct sunlight. Plus, we rarely view it during those times.

[jagabo]

Lcos sets have mostly disappeared from the market as fashion has dictated that flat panels are "in". There are a few left. Same with CRT.

As others have pointed out, many of the weaknesses of LCD and plasma have been alleviated (though not completely eliminated) in recent generations. (Note that many of the Displaymate articles are several years old.) You should go to a big box store and view different sets for yourself. You should have an idea what problems to look for now.

[Browncoat]

What about OLED(organic light emitting diodes)? Wasn't that tech touted as the next big thing? Is it a failed concept or just too far off yet to be on anyones radar?

[V Bot]

I have a Samsung 50" Plasma PN50A550 (Last Year's Model), I love it. There have been many advances in technology, so if burn in is an issue. Unless you are going to leave it on 24 hrs a day, which I wouldn't think would be good for Plasma or LCD. I chose Plasma because of the sharper picture, the LCDs seem to have some after effect when there is fast motion on the screen. Maybe they've gotten better about that, but I still prefer Plasma. I paid over $1400.00 for this television and think it was very well worth it. I looked at Pioneer, Panasonic, Sanyo and Samsung. The Samsung had a better picture than those others. Also had a great rating. Well look around and don't forget to consider room size. Read an article on CDFreaks yesterday and they mentioned that consumers should wait due to newer technology coming soon. That will always be the case, you go out and buy something that's the new thing and then there is already something newer and of course more expensive. So good luck.

[jagabo]

The biggest OLED display available is something like 11 inches. And SED appears to be dead before getting anywhere near the market. Too bad, it looked very promising.

[MOVIEGEEK]

That article posted by jagabo is informative but it is outdated(written in 2005).LED is the most energy conserving technology today but expensive, I plan on buying one in two years. OLED looks very promising but as was mentioned the screen sizes are small now and it's probably 5 years from mass production. Plasma has the best picture but they are energy hogs and if current sales trends(and energy regulations) continue they will be gone in 3 years. Another thing to look for is Energy Star 3.0, it is the current standard for energy savings.
As for 120Hz and 240Hz HDTV's I don't like them and the manufacturers are using it as a selling point, sort of like cordless phones(eg 800MHz,1.6GHz,3.2GHz,etc) where they think higher means better.

[jagabo]

That article posted by jagabo is informative but it is outdated(written in 2005).

The LCD/Plasma shootout at Extremtech and DisplayMate is recent (2009). The other articles at DisplayMate are outdated but still contain some useful information.

[MysticE]

Is there any new tech on the way that I should really wait for? considering this screen will probably have to last for quite a while before I can buy again.

Thanks peoples.

In my opinion many of the objections in the past on LCD TVs are no longer valid. If you need the TV to last for quite a while, then you need to skip plasma and go with LCD. Plasma TVs are not expected to last as long as LCD TVs according to the projected longevity numbers I've seen.

LED seems to be the next big thing, but as you said in your post it's quite expensive and in my opinion not really worth the cost at this time. Perhaps in 3-5 years costs will be down quite a bit and it will be worth considering.

More myths about plasma longevity. In real world evaluations, when Consumers Reports did their last reliability survey, 75,000 respondents over 4 years, they deemed the Panasonic plasmas to be some of the most reliable TVs ever tested. With only 2% of respondents reporting problems.

From personal experience my original 42" Panasonic EDTV plasma, which has been running 16 hours a day for almost 4 years, looks exactly like it did when new with zero problems.

[jman98]

Is there any new tech on the way that I should really wait for? considering this screen will probably have to last for quite a while before I can buy again.

Thanks peoples.

In my opinion many of the objections in the past on LCD TVs are no longer valid. If you need the TV to last for quite a while, then you need to skip plasma and go with LCD. Plasma TVs are not expected to last as long as LCD TVs according to the projected longevity numbers I've seen.

LED seems to be the next big thing, but as you said in your post it's quite expensive and in my opinion not really worth the cost at this time. Perhaps in 3-5 years costs will be down quite a bit and it will be worth considering.

More myths about plasma longevity. In real world evaluations, when Consumers Reports did their last reliability survey, 75,000 respondents over 4 years, they deemed the Panasonic plasmas to be some of the most reliable TVs ever tested. With only 2% of respondents reporting problems.

From personal experience my original 42" Panasonic EDTV plasma, which has been running 16 hours a day for almost 4 years, looks exactly like it did when new with zero problems.

This is well within the expected lifespan of plasma TVs. In fact, it's not even close to reaching the end of the numbers I've seen for projected lifespan. However, that does not in and of itself mean that LCDs won't last longer. Unless you can cough up some hard info that plasma TVs cost less than LCD and will last as long or longer, I still think the original poster should consider LCD as the best combo of value + longevity.