| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 122635 | 2012-01-04 04:26:00 | LCD tv comparison | GameJunkie (72) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1252080 | 2012-01-04 18:12:00 | When people say don't buy a particular brand I wish they would say why. I don't know much about LCD's But I do know that Lg is a very trusted reliable brand and has been for year. It wins consumer surveys every year. It is a South Korean company and used to be called Goldstar. Of course Sony is also known as a top brand. |
Digby (677) | ||
| 1252081 | 2012-01-05 03:54:00 | But I do know that Lg is a very trusted reliable brand and has been for year. For year.... Classic thats about right :) |
radium (8645) | ||
| 1252082 | 2012-01-05 21:48:00 | It is a South Korean company and used to be called Goldstar. Digby, our son would say: Goldstar make toasters don't they. We are also looking for a replacement TV, there seem to be plenty of LG's on floor shops !, we thought a 40" Bravia would suit the small area in our lounge, not many places to place the d a m n things, lol. Lurking. |
Lurking (218) | ||
| 1252083 | 2012-01-06 10:28:00 | My research would tend to indicate that plasma is better if you are buying the cheap models as it has less issues with motion and naturally superior blacks. Just FYI, take a look at your screen when the TV is off and that is as black as it can ever get. TVs (of any type) can't do 'black' any more than white movie theatre screens can (but I bet you never noticed!!). The best they can do is 'contrast ratio' and there is a finite limit to how much luminance a TV screen can pump out before it becomes uncomfortable to your eyes. Even 'black and white" TV was at best pale grey/green & white, but it sure looked 'black & white'. All these fantastic 2000:1 or 10,000:1 etc ratios that are quoted are simply advertising puffery and those whopping contrast-ratio figures are generated by special test set-ups. TVs and movies cannot reproduce black at all, so chose your TV by subjective image quality, but don't trust the shop display because that is usually in the special 'display' mode, tuned to sell, and is not natural or even what you will get when you tune in at home. So, buy by price or reputation, view an 'off air' image in the shop if you can to make a valid comparison between sets, then sit back and enjoy the entertainment, the 'numbers' are virtually meaningless. I have a 32" Sony Bravia (fluoro backlight) about 3-4 years old, a 22" Samsung a few months old (also fluoro) and a 20" Sanyo in my office (from Santa) with LED backlight, and when correctly set up, they all produce the identical image quality. Cheers Billy 8-{) |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 1252084 | 2012-01-06 13:12:00 | When people say don't buy a particular brand I wish they would say why. I don't know much about LCD's But I do know that Lg is a very trusted reliable brand and has been for year. It wins consumer surveys every year. It is a South Korean company and used to be called Goldstar. Of course Sony is also known as a top brand. Not trusted anymore Here (www.greenwala.com) |
wmoore (6009) | ||
| 1252085 | 2012-01-06 13:20:00 | Not trusted anymore Here (www.greenwala.com) lol damn thats clever. |
Alex B (15479) | ||
| 1252086 | 2012-01-06 21:50:00 | Just FYI, take a look at your screen when the TV is off and that is as black as it can ever get. TVs (of any type) can't do 'black' any more than white movie theatre screens can (but I bet you never noticed!!). The best they can do is 'contrast ratio' and there is a finite limit to how much luminance a TV screen can pump out before it becomes uncomfortable to your eyes. Even 'black and white" TV was at best pale grey/green & white, but it sure looked 'black & white'. All these fantastic 2000:1 or 10,000:1 etc ratios that are quoted are simply advertising puffery and those whopping contrast-ratio figures are generated by special test set-ups. TVs and movies cannot reproduce black at all, so chose your TV by subjective image quality, but don't trust the shop display because that is usually in the special 'display' mode, tuned to sell, and is not natural or even what you will get when you tune in at home. So, buy by price or reputation, view an 'off air' image in the shop if you can to make a valid comparison between sets, then sit back and enjoy the entertainment, the 'numbers' are virtually meaningless. I have a 32" Sony Bravia (fluoro backlight) about 3-4 years old, a 22" Samsung a few months old (also fluoro) and a 20" Sanyo in my office (from Santa) with LED backlight, and when correctly set up, they all produce the identical image quality. Cheers Billy 8-{) Yeah I basically agree with all that except; LCD's will never be as black as when turned off because the backlight is also off. Plasma doesn't use a backlight so in fact can approach black about as good as anything can, even on the cheap models which is what I was getting at with my superior blacks comment. Basically if you get a cheap 50hz mode without motionflow or similar technology and mainly watch TV / Sport / Movies with it the plasma has an edge because it suffers less from the problems cheap LCDs have. In practice though this is such a small difference you might never notice and other factors are probably more important such as weight, screen reflectiveness, features / inputs. What bugs me is people seem to dismiss plasma as an inferior technology and I don't believe this to be true. Manufacturers seem to have chosen LCD as the preferred technology and that's where they are spending most of the development money, but that decision is based on commercial reasons more than which is the superior technology in my opinion. I personally would pick a LED LCD TV with all the bells and whistles if I was buying new and could afford it, but there is nothing wrong with plasma and it is totally worth considering. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1252087 | 2012-01-07 09:18:00 | Yeah I basically agree with all that except; LCD's will never be as black as when turned off because the backlight is also off . Plasma doesn't use a backlight so in fact can approach black about as good as anything can, even on the cheap models which is what I was getting at with my superior blacks comment . The practical outcome in normal usage is still the same! For program material, 'black' is produced by a total block on the transmission of light, and whether that is an LCD cell switched to blocking mode or a Plasma cell switched off makes little difference, especially given the variability of the program sources and the often limited dynamic range of the media they originate from . The backlight of an LCD does not contribute to the production of 'black' at all; black being the absence of screen illumination, and the same applies to Plasma, however in that instance black is all pixel cells 'off', which is technically the same as LCD, except that there is no backlight . With no video signal, an LCD screen is 'black' just like a plasma . It is the latter that gives rise to the myth of "deeper blacks" and it is also the reason why the argument is academic, because the ultimate 'blackness' can only be measured with instruments but it is a non-sequitur because no program contains that level of dynamic range in luminosity . Also, the human eye has a relatively limited dynamic range for the detection of luminance levels, and reduced resolving power for colours, plus a significant lag factor (slow response to changes in brightness) so in reality, extreme contrast ratios are not important . However, the human eye is fairly good at detecting changes in hue, so that is what we follow on a TV or movie screen, along with the underlying luminance/contrast changes . Basically it is all just marketing hype and nobody sitting watching a movie is ever going to leap to their feet and say 'gee whizz, will you look at that dynamic range! Those blacks are really great!' Plasma's worst defect is burn-in from stationary images like Logos etc, and I'm picking that before too much longer, OLED technology will wipe both Plasma and LCD from the market . Cheers Billy 8-{) |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 1252088 | 2012-01-07 09:45:00 | Burn-in is a myth as well. If you leave one static image on the screen for months it might happen, otherwise no. I have never seen a CRT TV with burn-in and they all supposedly had that issue. I have seen it on old Green screen CRT monitors that were left with a static display 24/7 but they were basically worn out by then anyway. You can tell the difference on an LCD with no signal and one that is turned off, the backlight does bleed through a little and make it a slightly lighter shade of dark grey. Plasma cells that are off don't emit any light at all, how is this not by definition black ? Anyway the argument is unimportant, the only point I was trying to make is plasma is worth considering and in my opinion cheap plasmas look better than cheap LCDs. Reviews I have read say the same thing. They also say plasma has less of the stutter noticeable during fast motion on cheap LCDs. When you move up to the better models all of this becomes a non-issue and they all look great. Please note I did not myself buy a plasma, but not because I thought my LCD was better. I got mine because I have a lot of windows in my lounge and didn't want a glossy reflective glass screen. I believe both techologies are awesome and it practice it doesn't matter which you get. As for OLEDs, maybe. But fast in the commercial world is anything under 5 years. CRTs took a very long time to dissappear after the first LCDs became afforable. I predict if OLED is released in large sizes it will hit the market at 10k plus over the next year or two and not get affordable for 1-2 years after that. They are always researching new Ideas though, something else may come along and take over from all of it. One day maybe we will get HD actual wallpaper we can line our wall with and trim to any size we like |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1252089 | 2012-01-07 10:14:00 | I got burn in on my plasma, It went away after a few hours but it had me concerned. | Metla (12) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||