One thing I look for when viewing TV in a show room is the jerkiness of the picture when a scene is panning.

If this happens I'd steer clear of it. You always want a smooth pan.

I thought you used a milk carton?

Best advice I've seen so far....If I could just add, make sure you buy from a reputable retailer ie. Richersounds-John lewis etc, just incase you change your mind when it's back home.... aftersales service really matters!!!. BTW had a panny plasma now have a Samsung LED-LCD series 7, love it to bits.

There is no both ways, plasmas do not blur pixels together, I look at my windows 7 desktop dealing with my htpc on a plasma at 1080p and it is pin sharp, if it were not I'd strain to read the text. So whatever you are talking about is just way off the mark.

Videophiles have been testing hdtv's for years now, resolution tests have been standard for a long long time, and at no time have they claimed that plasma does not deliver the resolution of hd when the panel could natively do so, let alone compared to lcd. In fact more resolution is apparent especially in newer 3d hdtv's where lcd's have been too slow to keep up with the shutter glasses, some even have to warm up for significant periods before their pixels gain any speed at all. Never mind plasmas have had true full resolution moving picture resolution for quite some time now whereas lcd's have been failing this for quite some time now as well.
http://gizmodo.com/323558/1080p-tvs-...er-than-others

http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/3...vs-lcd-3d.html

http://reviews.cnet.com/best-high-de...a1.0;buyAdvice
Best overall hdtv's.. plasmas

I'm not sure where you are getting your information from because it is wrong.

Perhaps you would care to explain why Plasma supposedly has better performance than LCD on SD pictures?.

Leave it Nigel, there's no reasoning with some people - especially those who forget we do this for a living and, have for many years, thus our comments are born out of experience, not blind prejudice. (BTW I CAN piss higher up the wall than you...)

You're probably taller than me!

I'm also long past such games

So. That doesn't mean you are always right. Nigel has been wrong on many occasions especially regarding televisions that he reckons are Turkish Vestels when they are most definitely not.

because the response time, colour and black level is better on plasma which helps out the poor quality SD you normally get from TV. You get less shimmering which makes SD look even worse.
LCD's in the past also had more pixels per inch which results in more up scaling and jiggery going on. But now Full HD LCD,LED & Plasma have the same pixel count.

It has nothing to do with "blury pixels" because that's just plain wrong.

To this day Plasma is the way to go if you really care about Picture quality. That's why they are still top recommendations on review sites and used in professional situations.

Which TV's are you talking about?, I generally say 'most' of a specific make are Vestel - if you're talking about Toshiba?, I believe I've already agreed with you that current ones 'may not' be Vestel.

There's a good article at the top of AVForums Plasma TV section explaining the benefits of plasma technology, written by people who really do know what they are talking about.

http://www.avforums.com/forums/plasma-tvs/

Response times aren't much different, and are of no consequence for slow moving images anyway - black level on modern decent quality LCD's is probably as good or better than Plasma. I've no idea what you mean by 'colour'?, except that Plasma colours are further from the required ones than both CRT and LCD.

So none of those are any reason for better SD.

Older JVC sets. Only since 2007 have JVC sets been Vestels. Before then most JVC sets were made in the UK and were more or less really Panasonic sets considering Panasonic used to own a huge chunk of JVC. Their CRT's mostly had Philips or LG tubes just like Panasonic sets. Despite the fact that the old Scottish JVC factory was quite well known you have still falsely said JVC sets were Vestels. Just look back at an old thread from 2007 where someone was interested in a JVC CRT and you were proved wrong that it was a Vestel.

So everyone with an LCD dont care about PQ, When it comes to HD I would put my sony up against anything.
Of course if ones viewing consists mainly of dark movies with pitch black conditions throughout then plasma will come out on top, But for day to day HD viewing you cant beat an LCD, and I can assure you I do care about PQ one hell of a lot.
And I thought plasma's were going out of fashion now anyway.

Many JVC LCD sets are (or at least were) Vestel ones, and many of their CRT sets were bought-in from various different sources - including some of their best sets, the Ferguson TX100 models. Pre-2007 there were certainly JVC CRT sets made by Vestel as well, same chassis as the Sharp Vestel models.

I don't recall ever seeing a JVC TV of any kind that bears any resemblance to a Panasonic set - I presume you're just imagining it, as (assuming you're right?) Panasonic own a share of JVC.

How about you explain how every tv expert who tests and compare s tv's delivered resolution of all tv's as part of their standard suite of tests, scrutinizing tiny test patterns down to the line, do not and have never supported your very strange conclusion that plasma works by blurring images. Your conclusion is bizarre and frankly kind of undermines your credibility on the subject. Testing delivered resolution on something like a "high definition" is a given.

Your theory doesn't even work on a purely practical matter, if plasmas blurred standard definition, they wouldn't be able to produce anything close to hd resolution by default, hell they would have to be blurring sd resolution because they couldn't even produce that. That is so wrong headed I don't know where to start.

Once again wrong, black levels are not better or even as good on most lcds. They aren't even close until you get to high end grid array led sets which are rather rare these days as most are simply edge lit tvs. These tv's work by blocking their bright backlights, and since there is always leakage, it is a losing battle.

Beyond scaling issues plasma tend to be better at sd because of that black level, and because they tend to produce a more natural picture, whereas if you have uber brightness defaults of lcd you will have unnatural contrasts in your picture that bring out every last bit of artifact in the picture.

In any case plasma like lcd has a fixed grid of pixels, a fixed resolution, so you are barking up the wrong tree.

exactly - until OLED comes out there is no better tech than Plasma on the market for TV.
Local LED TV's do improve things a lot but again problems arise in the form on halo effects. They would need to have a LED for every pixel to remove this. + viewing angles are still washed out.

As for LCD giving better HD picture - a 1080p LCD and 1080p Plasma have the same pixels etc. Plasmas better black, viewing angle, screen uniformity and colour ADD to the HD picture so that statement is pure BS.

Sometimes peoples Idea of a good picture is too bright, too colourful and too sharp. "the orange face syndrome"

Well any internet search will confirm that JVC didn't start using Vestel until 2007. Many of the sets that were made between 2000 and 2006 were probably better than the Ferguson models and were Made in the UK so they were definitely not Vestels. Many of the Widescreen models were nearly identical to the Panasonic sets.
Whether i am right or wrong the point is i don't think my opinion is always right. My problem was with another poster who said because you both have worked in the industry for years you are always right. Not only i have known of people who work in the industry to be wrong (nobody can know everything) some of what is said on here can be opinion. Including those that think Plasma is still better for both SD and HD content.

How can an Internet search confirm that? - JVC sold badged Vestel CRT sets long before 2007 - that would be the date of badged LCD sets, not CRT ones.


We've had a LOT of both JVC and Panasonic TV's come in for disposal, and none of the JVC sets bear any resemblance to the Panasonic ones.

Still thinking you are always right i see?

Televisions are what I do - and have for many years, what's your expertise on them based on?.

I don't pretend to be an expert. I know people people who have or are still working in the industry. Someone who used to work for a tv rental company, someone who has worked at an independent for decades and someone who is a semi retired repairman. Believe me their views often differ and their knowledge will differ amongst different areas. That is my point even if you have worked in televisions for years doesn't mean you will know everything. Also has i said the issue of preferring the images on a Plasma is opinion based and it doesn't matter whether it's Joe Bloggs on the high street or a tv engineer both have equally valid opinions.

If televisions were really what you "do" any certified installer would know about color calibration/resolution tests, its standard fundamental knowledge. None would claim plasma has a lower resolution.

And I do, so know about the lower number of colours and solarisation - but I'm a service engineer not an 'installer' - and I've no idea what a 'certified' installer is supposed to be.