Plasma or LCD?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 13, 2006 | 06:05 PM
  #1  
thetruck's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
From: South Carolina
Plasma or LCD?

I am looking to get a flat screen TV. What are the pros and cons of these two types? Will video games affect one or the other? Any info will be helpful!
 
Reply
Old Dec 13, 2006 | 06:09 PM
  #2  
Lumadar's Avatar
Suspended
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,622
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Lightbulb

Call it a day and get a Panasonic Plasma. Try google and you will find a million write-ups on pros vs cons.
 
Reply
Old Dec 13, 2006 | 07:06 PM
  #3  
Stealth's Avatar
Senior Member
Truck of the Month
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 17,118
Likes: 7
From: Burleson, Texas
If you are a gamer don't get a plasma. They have a tendency to burn in on the plasma screen.
 
Reply
Old Dec 13, 2006 | 07:41 PM
  #4  
Gear Jammer's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
From: Leesburg,Ga
I've got an LCD flat panel and I love it. Great picture quality and decent sound. Mine is a Sanyo.
 
Reply
Old Dec 13, 2006 | 07:53 PM
  #5  
CajunJosh's Avatar
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
From: Texas
If you really want a flat pannel back when I did the research I ended up finding that LCD was the better choice over all, however I am more then satisfied with my DLP television which was half the cost and I believe comparable to my friends 42" Sony LCD 3000 dollar tv when I only paid 1400 for a 50".
 
Reply
Old Dec 13, 2006 | 09:03 PM
  #6  
Invalid_access's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 976
Likes: 0
From: Fort Valley, Ga
I got the Toshiba Regza 32 inch lcd. I'd go look at them and decide what look best for what you can afford.
 
Reply
Old Dec 13, 2006 | 09:24 PM
  #7  
thetruck's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
From: South Carolina
Originally Posted by Invalid_access
I got the Toshiba Regza 32 inch lcd. I'd go look at them and decide what look best for what you can afford.
Money isn't an issue. I'm not concerned about the price. This TV will be used for 60% gaming. And I'm looking to go bigger than 50 inch.
 
Reply
Old Dec 13, 2006 | 09:37 PM
  #8  
vader716's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,079
Likes: 0
From: Pikesville, MD
I just bought a Sony LCD XBR line. It has a great picture. I got LCD because of the gaming needs and burn in concerns. There has been great progress made on the Plasmas regarding burn in but it hasn't been elimiated.
 
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2006 | 07:12 AM
  #9  
wstahlm80's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
From: ???.....depends on the day
LCD......Plasma is a waste of money at this point in time.......
 
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2006 | 07:22 AM
  #10  
F150Europe's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
From: The Netherlands
I just finished reading an article about flatscreens.
If you can wait, wait and buy in 2007.
There will be a pricedrop of about 25-35%.
Reason is competition, overproduction and less sales than expected.

The article mentions that a 32 inch lcd screen has dropped 70% since it's introduction in the US.
 
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2006 | 02:23 PM
  #11  
Kool Aid's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,160
Likes: 0
From: Knoxville, TN.
Originally Posted by wstahlm80
LCD......Plasma is a waste of money at this point in time.......
If you want the best possible picture, and you have the money to spend, you can't beat a Plasma display.

It's not a waste for some.....it's well spent.

:santa:
 
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2006 | 02:53 PM
  #12  
Lumadar's Avatar
Suspended
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,622
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Post

People that talk crap about plasmas literally have NO idea what they are talking about. There is a popular MISCONCEPTION that Plasma is the cheap alternative to LCD. Do some real research and you will find that to be quite untrue... Plasma outscores DLP projection TVs in picture quality these days (Well, Panasonic does).

Plasma has come a LONG way since its introduction...
 
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2006 | 02:57 PM
  #13  
KSUWildcat's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
From: Pratt, KS
Just buy it and forget about it. Last year around this time we heard, "Wait until 2006!" Now we are hearing the same old thing, "Wait until 2007!" I'll admit there is some benefit financially to waiting a few months, but you don't have a flat screen to enjoy at the moment either.

Point is, the prices of these things will continue to drop far after 2007 and you'll always be kicking yourself for not waiting and getting the same TV for cheaper or a better TV for the same price. So just buy it, enjoy your purchase, and ignore any further price breaks on flat screens.
 
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2006 | 03:14 PM
  #14  
wstahlm80's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
From: ???.....depends on the day
Originally Posted by Lumadar
People that talk crap about plasmas literally have NO idea what they are talking about. There is a popular MISCONCEPTION that Plasma is the cheap alternative to LCD. Do some real research and you will find that to be quite untrue... Plasma outscores DLP projection TVs in picture quality these days (Well, Panasonic does).

Plasma has come a LONG way since its introduction...
I never said LCD was better then PLASMA.....I know that the pic quality is great for a PLASMA......but there are still some serious (IMO) technical issues with a PLASMA tv.....at least for the typical consumer......

....if a couple of $grand$ means nothing to you and you are more than comfortable purchasing a high dollar item with a short life.....then by all means get a plasma......but there are still serious issues in regards to "burn-in" and "life expectency" of the gas......I know that I would never through that kind of dough at a product that is not going to give me a good "bang for my buck".......purchasing technology is bad enough....no matter what you buy whether it be a new mouse or a high-def tv.....it will most likely be outdated before you get home to open the box.........
 
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2006 | 05:12 PM
  #15  
Lumadar's Avatar
Suspended
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,622
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Post

Life expectancy problems with a plasma? I'm pretty sure 60,000 hours of use (read: avg 3.5 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year, =1274 hours of TV in a full year. Then you figure the plasma has 60k hours, divided by 1274 = 47 years. Yeah...I think it will last me just fine. )

Burning in issues? More like NON-issue. Plasma has come a LONG way in just the last couple years... and the stereotypes no9 longer apply. I game all the time on mine and have ZERO burn-in issues.

Try reading some NEW reviews...you would be quite surprised (and probably impressed) with where plasma TVs are today. For a 42 inch TV, 9 out of 10 people will tell you Plasma is the ONLY way to go. Of course when you go into significantly larger screens, they do get pricey...but what doesn't ?
 
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:39 AM.