plazma , lcd or wait

1080i - worth it in the long run
lcd (not plasma) - worth it in the long run
 
The LCD plasma debate seems to be leaning towards plasma for larger screens and LCD for the smaller ones. At 42" they say plasma is the way to go.

Not worth bothering with a 720p screen though it should be at least 1080i, although true HD will give you 1080p

I'd recommend you pick up a copy of What HiFi? Sound and Vision and read the reviews in there. The retailers in there are usually a lot cheaper than most too.

Hope this helps.
 
nice one chaps ill buy the mag tomoro
 
johnyj said:
have found this one http://www.laskys.com/televisions/plasma_tvs/plasma_tvs_40/philips_42pf5521d_10.html
which is 1080i with loads of connections and good price
all the 1080p tv are over 1000
Click to expand...

It's worth it though. Even standard DVDs look great on a 1080.

The difference between a 768 HD ready and a standard 625 tv is literally that difference. It's not worth the money. They'll be obsolete in 5 years. If you can't afford a 1080 then wait. I am. I know exactly which TV I want but I'm waiting for the price to come down.

Also you need to look at the refresh rate. ie the speed in which the picture is refreshed. 6ms or less is best. Anything more and you can get bluring. Get the tv store to put a fast moving picture up. Or even just scrolling text. You'll see the difference.
 
best price for performance LCD tv is currently the Sony KDL-xxW2000 (replace the xx with the screen size) series. The 40W2000 is 30% above your budget at £1200, but considering that they are proper 1080p, and beat plasma's on black and picture quality - they are a real investment that will last a while, and well worth the stretch.

unless of course you need HDMI 1.3.... and thats going to be out in a few months...

if the budgets fixed to £800, i'd get a samsung.
 
I have to agree with Madvw - Thats exactly what I am planning to do! The Sony's are easily the best on the market and they use the samsung screens anyway, so if your budget cant stretch to the Sony then defiantely go for the Samsungs instead!
 
I'd have to disagree there, I believe that Pioneer has the best picture
 
Which Pioneer are you reffering to?
 
Even 625 pioneers have great pictures! Not seen a 1080 though, it'd have to be pretty f****** good to beat the sonys I've seen.
 
its all going to be up in the air with HDMI 1.3 though, but to get the benefit your going to need blurays that are specially encoded to use the deep colours space. How long before we see those? exactly. Unless of course you have a PS3, which is HDMI 1.3 already.

Plasma beating LCD's have arrived, and they're cheap.
 
Just purchased Sony KDL-40S2530 - Its the dogs b*****S. The sound is fantastic - cranked it up to half way - Wow......
As expected picture is brilliant...
 
Went into Bang and Olufsen in Bromley over the weekend and nearly walked out with the receipt for a Beovision 4, what an amazing piece of equipment that is.
 
audi upgrades
For 12 grand I'd ****** hope so too!!
 
£800 will get you a Toshiba 37WLT68.
I have the 32WLT68.
Amazing picture,really ****** amazing.
Great sound too.
So much so that I sold the optional subwoofer that I ordered with it.
Doesn't need it.
 
I have a Sony 32" LCD, cannot remember the No
but it is £1200's worth.

Sport is absolute rubbish and almost unwatchable for blurring.

Most other programmes are fine and yes for static picture quality
quite amazing, but I am a sports fan.

Moto Gp is very bad as riders are often close together.

My advice, and I wish I had done it, is to stick with
good old CRT until forced to change.
 
malcolm1sim said:
I have a Sony 32" LCD, cannot remember the No
but it is £1200's worth.

Sport is absolute rubbish and almost unwatchable for blurring.

Most other programmes are fine and yes for static picture quality
quite amazing, but I am a sports fan.

Moto Gp is very bad as riders are often close together.

My advice, and I wish I had done it, is to stick with
good old CRT until forced to change.
Click to expand...

Isnt this the bit when buying, you have to take into account the screen refresh rate (under 6 or 8ms is it for a decent LCD)... Plasma is about 3ms I believe...
Not sure what the refresh is on my Sony but I dont notice blurring anywhere near to what you say....
 
me neither. I now have a Sony 40w2000 and on sky sports HD, its the best i have ever seen, seriously (exotic models aside)... Thats 40", and with the offers, cost less than £1200. It's not got the bravia EX engine like the X series, just the plain bravia, but i notice no blurring during sport, or more importantly, playing motorstorm.

Interestingly too, people with 100Hz panels have been complaing that some HD sources, like sky HD, actually look WORSE when on 100Hz... the fix is to turn it back to 50Hz.....

dont forget that the source is just as important when watching large format TV's.
 
No blurring on my Toshiba 32WLT68 on SD or HD.
That's with the M100 (100hz) processing on.
The best compliment I can give my telly is that the picture is as good as my old CRT on SD,with the obvious vast improvement on HD.
No picture complaints at all.
No motion blur on football or MotoGP,both of which I watch a lot.
Please note I have everything (SD and HD,obviously) going through the HDMI.
That definitely makes SD better than with a scart.
I used to get bad 'artifacts' on BBC through SD scart,but they disappeared on SD HDMI.
 
mitch78 said:
A plasma will ALWAYS outperform an LCD in terms of black levels, as LCDs have a backlight to illuminate the pixels, which is permanently lit. This means that the closest you'll ever get to black, is no colour information in the pixel, just the backlight. Grey. Plasmas light pixels individually, so if it's supposed to be black, it's turned off copmpletely and is therefore much darker.
Click to expand...

thats simply not true.

read anywhere on the black capabilities and contrast of the W series.

Heres a quick google:
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/Sony-LCD-vs-Pioneer-Plasma/ - admittedly the Pioneer PDP4270XD isnt the facelifted PDP427XD, but it may as well be.

every review rates the black capability of the W series as a LCD that finally beats plasma.

There will always be the plasma VS. LCD debate ;) :thumbsup:
 
I always say plasma, there always ahead of the LCD>

the latest panasonic models (circa 1k) wipe the floor with Black levels and viewing angle and of course theres no 'ghosting' with plasma

and the latest gen is 1080i

of course they do consume more power than LCD but hay.

when testing multiple models before i couldnt tell the diff between 720 and 1080 anyway. at that sort of detail your best of picking a screen that can pull off better blacks and deeper colours. your eyes will notice this over the resolution easily.

PS upscaling to a 1080 native LCD sucks big time.
 
bowfer said:
No blurring on my Toshiba 32WLT68 on SD or HD.
That's with the M100 (100hz) processing on.
Click to expand...
I've got the previous model 32WLT66 and thats spot on. I did a lot of reading up before buying and it was getting great reviews from those who now more about it than me.

The only fault I have is that watching 'ye olde' sky,the picture is hopeless. Spent good money on a quality scart lead which improved things but no where near the quality of the DTV. That said though, its still better than the crt I replaced.
 
Sinny71 said:
I've got the previous model 32WLT66 and thats spot on. I did a lot of reading up before buying and it was getting great reviews from those who now more about it than me.

The only fault I have is that watching 'ye olde' sky,the picture is hopeless. Spent good money on a quality scart lead which improved things but no where near the quality of the DTV. That said though, its still better than the crt I replaced.
Click to expand...

The Upscaler chip did get a slating in the review i read. could be why..

what signal are you sending from sky? svideo or RGB?
 
Quite possibly..?? Just RGB as far as I can remember.

The Xbox and DVD player are both HDMI and so give no problems. Maybe I need to look into it again.
 
worth checking it is RGB, it makes quite a diff over svid

if its really bothering you, try an external upscaler, there not that expensive
 
Not sure I'd bother as I'm planning to go for SkyHD in time anyway. Will def. check out the RGB/Svid though.
 
My LT68's SD picture (SKY HD via HDMI) is superb.
Honestly,it's so good I sometimes find myself assuming I'm watching football in HD,only to find I've watched the whole game in SD !
That said,the HD picture is,without a doubt,better again.
Once you change,you do notice the difference,but SD is still great.
Better than it was using SKY+ scart,that's for sure.
I would envisage you'll notice a marked improvement on SD once you connect your HD,because SKY HD automatically upscales the picture even on SD content.
Not to HD levels,obviously,but it does upscale SD.

I only hope,for your sanity's sake,you get a quiet HD box.
I'm on my third.
This one is bearable,but it's still far from quiet.
If you want a quick tip,get the engineer to show you the version number as soon as he plugs it in (services > system details )
If it's a 4E3007,it should be quieter than the 4E3006 versions.

There are MASSIVE threads on AV forums about the unholy racket HD boxes make,ranging from sounding like planes taking off to vacuum cleaners to hairdryers to all manner of clicking/scraping noises.
Basically,don't expect it to be as quiet as your SKY+,no siree....
 
This thread is getting interesting, clearly I know little about all this
and understand less.

See my comments above about poor picture quality.

I now know my TV is a Sony 32V2500.

Are you guys saying, that if I get an upgraded cable box, ie one that will
accept HD Signals and connect through the HD input then all
signals will be "upscaled" thus improving my picture, and that I do not have to subscribe to HD channels.

Lokk forward to hearing from you.

Malcolm
 
malcolm1sim said:
This thread is getting interesting, clearly I know little about all this
and understand less.
See my comments above about poor picture quality.
I now know my TV is a Sony 32V2500.
Are you guys saying, that if I get an upgraded cable box, ie one that will
accept HD Signals and connect through the HD input then all
signals will be "upscaled" thus improving my picture, and that I do not have to subscribe to HD channels.
Lokk forward to hearing from you.
Malcolm
Click to expand...

I suppose the quick answer is yes.
You'd also benefit from the greater recording capability of the HD box (160gb standard).
However,it would be a bit daft (IMO) to spend money on an HD box just to benefit from better SD pictures,wouldn't it ?
You might as well just pay the extra £10 month and get HD as well,wouldn't you ?
Granted,the choice of HD channels isn't great at the moment,but more and more are coming online.
MTV and Eurosport are going HD soon,for example.
If you've got an HD TV and an HD box,it would seem a bit silly not get HD,wouldn't it ?
Like putting remoulds on a Ferrari,you're not getting the full benefit.
 
wow this thread is getting alot of good coments
have been away for 5 weeks because of changing isp (mental note dont go to tiscali)
but have been looking at tv's have come down to these what do you think
toshiba
http://www.digitaldirect.co.uk/products_moreinfo3/index.asp?product_id=12654#Scene_1
philips
http://www.laskys.com/televisions/lcd_tvs/lcd_tvs_40/philips_42pfl7662d_05.html#specification
or maybe one with ambilight has anyone got one?

these are my preferences
1080p
42"
pcinput
2 hdmi
usb
budget is £1000ish and plazma or lcd
have bought what hifi on lcd and plazma and is a very good read
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

a3rick
LCD or Plasma
Replies
13
Views
5K
BillTheButcher
BillTheButcher
W
lcd or plasma
Replies
55
Views
8K
mike60e
mike60e
arthurfuxake
LCD or Plasma
Replies
69
Views
7K
Staz
Staz
technics100
Which to Buy - LCD or Plasma - HD or not?
Replies
26
Views
3K
S3K
S3K
T
woolworths lcd
Replies
1
Views
1K
IanL-RS3
I
Top
Back