Plasma vs. LCD vs. LED?

I am looking into getting a new tv, and I have been doing some research, but I was wondering if anyone else has had any experience with the options out there today.

One of the drawbacks to LCD's has always been that they don't do black very well, but with the 3,000,000 to 1 contrast ratio's, and can't believe that matters very much.

Let me know what you guys think

Plasmas are still best for absolute PQ. Now that Pioneer has exited the market, the best plasmas are made by Panasonic. The only reason I'd ever buy an LCD was if I was planning to do a lot of daytime viewing. They tend to do better in daylight circumstances.

Before the plasma fanboys flood this thread with posts of "PLASMA IS THE ONLY CHOICE!!!" I'll say: It depends. Plasma does blacks better than LCD, but LCD does whites better than plasma. The general consensus is that plasma's overall picture quality and response time is better. Plasma screens tend to be very reflective and work best if you have a dedicated media room with no ambient light. Plasma is also heavier and uses more energy than LCD. I bought an LCD for my media room, which has two large south-facing windows opposite the screen and have been satisfied my choice.

I also got an LCD because my home has an open floor plan and there is a lot of light in the area with the TV. I tried both out side-by-side and ended up returning the plasma. If I was looking today I would strongly consider LED though.

I don't know much about this, but I went through it about 18 months ago. Basic conclusion is basically what AC said. Plasma = slightly better picture, quite reflective, VERY heavy, massive energy hog, and quite a bit cheaper.

Originally Posted by Ambulance Chaser

Click to expand...

Before the plasma fanboys flood this thread with posts of "PLASMA IS THE ONLY CHOICE!!!" I'll say: It depends. Plasma does blacks better than LCD, but LCD does whites better than plasma. The general consensus is that plasma's overall picture quality and response time is better. Plasma screens tend to be very reflective and work best if you have a dedicated media room with no ambient light. Plasma is also heavier and uses more energy than LCD. I bought an LCD for my media room, which has two large south-facing windows opposite the screen and have been satisfied my choice.

Blacks are a much bigger issue for overall PQ. The issue of the quality of whites is negligible and I've never even heard it mentioned outside of projector or projector screen reviews. It sounds like something LCD marketers invented to counter plasma's better blacks. When it comes to whites, unless they are just awful and have a noticeable tint to them, I have never heard a complaint about whites on a plasma. The best plasmas have more accurate colors in general. I can see where the white comments come from though... LCDs ARE inherently brighter, and that can be both an advantage or disadvantage, depending on the usage scenario. And the glare you mentioned is the reason I said I wouldn't get a plasma for daytime viewing.

Originally Posted by BrianVarick

Click to expand...

I am looking into getting a new tv, and I have been doing some research, but I was wondering if anyone else has had any experience with the options out there today. One of the drawbacks to LCD's has always been that they don't do black very well, but with the 3,000,000 to 1 contrast ratio's, and can't believe that matters very much. Let me know what you guys think

The answer is, it depends. There is no single industry standard on contrast ratios so they are useless when comparing panels from different brands or technologies. BTW, LEDs are technically LCDs with LED backlight. If you play a lot of video games in a room with a lot of ambient light (read windows) and are not too concerned with getting the best picture quality possible ( read don't own a blu ray player) the LCD may be the best choice for you. LCDs have a plastic screen which is not as reflective as plasma's glass screen though both use anti-reflective coatings that help. If you are into home theater and watch movies mostly at night a plasma may be a better choice. They are heavier but that does not matter once you mount the panel or place it on a stand. They do consume a little more energy but not much more than an extra incandescent light bulb.

Originally Posted by Ambulance Chaser

Click to expand...

Before the plasma fanboys flood this thread with posts of "PLASMA IS THE ONLY CHOICE!!!" I'll say: It depends. Plasma does blacks better than LCD, but LCD does whites better than plasma.
Most LCDs do not have better whites than plasma. To get good whites on a LCD white LEDs have to be used for backlighting instead of RGB LEDS and AFAIK a very small number of panels use them. I agree with the rest of your poast. I had a 480p Panasonic industrial plasma monitor for almost 6 years and has been very happy with it. It can still looks better than any TV I saw on SD content. It has recently been supplemented with a 1080p ISF-Calibrated "The Last of the Kuros" plasma which looks pretty awesome. Last year I bought my in-laws a 46" Sony LCD and a 26" Toshiba LCD and was not impressed with picture quality, especially on Standard Definition content.

This has been helpful, thanks guys I think it's going to come down to whichever looks best in the store, and whatever we can get a great deal on. Since there is no clear winner between the two, I think this is a fairly safe choice.

^^

By all means, pick on price, but please don't pick by what looks best in the store. It's completely meaningless unless you plan on installing flourescents in your living room and cranking up the brightness of your display to blinding levels, not to mention all the potential feed/configuration problems that invariably contribute to an apples to oranges comparison between just about any 2 displays.

LCDs are going to look better in the store because of the flourescent lighting. Plasma will look better at home with all the lights off.

Just spend as little as possible so you don't feel guilty buying a new TV in 5 years. I got a 42" 720p panasonic plasma for $500 before turkey day, no regrets.

The quality of the TVs these days far exceeds the quality of the broadcast material unless you're exclusively watching bluray dvds.

Plasma may become extinct over power consumption concerns, so take the opportunity now to buy a plasma at a much more competitive price than an LCD.

That's dead technology. Buy cheap, and wait for the OLED's.

Originally Posted by Hombre Secreto

Click to expand...

That's dead technology. Buy cheap, and wait for the OLED's.

LOL, OLED wont hit home TV use for another decade. Wait for 3D, thats the future, James Cameron said so and he made True Lies, so I believe him.

Originally Posted by r...

Click to expand...

LOL, OLED wont hit home TV use for another decade. Wait for 3D, thats the future, James Cameron said so and he made True Lies, so I believe him.
What the hell are you babbling about???

LG Display promising 20-inch OLED panels in 2010, 40-inch version in 2012 Posted by Sean Portnoy @ 6:51 pm Categories: Home Theater Tags: LG Electronics Inc., Organic Light-emitting Diode, TV, Sean Portnoy 1 TalkBack PrintEmailThumbs UpThumbs Down+5 5 If you’ve seen an OLED display in person, you know why people are searching for any shred of information that new TVs based on the technology will be released soon—its seemingly unbeatable combination of slimness and ultra-high contrast ratio. It’s been a couple of years since Sony debuted its 11.1-inch XEL-1, which still costs over $2,000 if you can find it. While Sony has been mum on any followups, LG has been talking up OLEDs, releasing a 15-inch set in Korea recently, but it’s not done yet. According to Tech-On, LG is planning to produce 20-inch OLED panels this year, to be followed by 30-inch displays next year, and 40-inch OLED displays in 2012. Unfortunately, there don’t seem to be any more details about whether these sets will ever see the light of day over here, or how much they would cost. An LG VP was blunt, though, about pricing: “They may be expensive, but it will be possible to buy a 40-inch class OLED TV in 2012.” Costs will need to drop a lot, however, in order for OLEDs to compete against LED-backlit LCDs, which should be commonplace for $1,000 or less in two years.

Click to expand...

http://blogs.zdnet.com/home-theater/?p=2608

Originally Posted by Hombre Secreto

Click to expand...

That's dead technology. Buy cheap, and wait for the OLED's.
No. It's the current technology. In case of plasma, it's current, mature technology. You get the benefit of several generations of gradual improvements at a reasonable price point. Large screen OLEDs have been vapor-ware for a few years now. If, according to the article you linked to, 40" OLEDs will be released in 2012, they are likely to carry a large price premium compared to LCD flat panels TVs, for at least a couple of years. Spending a little extra right now for extra features or picture quality is certainly worth it, since he will have to live with this TV for at least 4-5 years.

Originally Posted by Dmax

Click to expand...

No. It's the current technology. In case of plasma, it's current, mature technology. You get the benefit of several generations of gradual improvements at a reasonable price point. Large screen OLEDs have been vapor-ware for a few years now. If, according to the article you linked to, 40" OLEDs will be released in 2012, they are likely to carry a large price premium compared to LCD flat panels TVs, for at least a couple of years. Spending a little extra right now for extra features or picture quality is certainly worth it, since he will have to live with this TV for at least 4-5 years.
Like I said buy cheap, and save for the OLED's. Why spend more then $1000 on a TV that will be put to shame by an OLED TV? Unless it's a 55" plus 1080p TV just go for the price. You can find decent 42" LCD, or Plasma TV's for less then $600.