DS Forums

 
 

Plasma,LCD or CRT?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-10-2005, 12:19
mervyn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 317

Hi,
Sorry if this has been asked before but as a 60yr old am a bit slow.
I have at the moment a nice 32"Sony Trinitron WideScreen TV. But I wish to decorate and re-carpet and do not want the dents that the weight of this TV causes.
I am looking for a Plasma or Lcd TV preferably 42" but would like to know which is best with Sky+.and a DVD player with 5:1 surround.
I have read so much conflicting evidence such as life-span, electricity use and picture quality etc etc.
Or should I stay with the bulky setup I have now? or is it an ideal time to change?
Look forward to hearing your advice.
mervyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 02-10-2005, 16:35
Dino
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: South Manchester
Posts: 1,990
Originally Posted by mervyn
Hi,
Sorry if this has been asked before but as a 60yr old am a bit slow.
I have at the moment a nice 32"Sony Trinitron WideScreen TV. But I wish to decorate and re-carpet and do not want the dents that the weight of this TV causes.
I am looking for a Plasma or Lcd TV preferably 42" but would like to know which is best with Sky+.and a DVD player with 5:1 surround.
I have read so much conflicting evidence such as life-span, electricity use and picture quality etc etc.
Or should I stay with the bulky setup I have now? or is it an ideal time to change?
Look forward to hearing your advice.
If it's weight that you are worried about, 42" displays still weigh enough to put dents in your carpet. They're no lightweights - sheer amount of glass you see. I'd wait for the prices to come down, myself, if you're not interested in having the latest technology yesterday, if you get my drift.
Dino is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2005, 18:13
Jarrak
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ilkeston
Posts: 18,075
Originally Posted by mervyn
I have at the moment a nice 32"Sony Trinitron WideScreen TV. But I wish to decorate and re-carpet and do not want the dents that the weight of this TV causes.
I am looking for a Plasma or Lcd TV preferably 42" but would like to know which is best with Sky+.and a DVD player with 5:1 surround.
I have read so much conflicting evidence such as life-span, electricity use and picture quality etc etc.
Or should I stay with the bulky setup I have now? or is it an ideal time to change?


Well both Plasma and LCD weigh less than the equivalent size CRT and of course can be wall mounted if required.
LCD's are lighter than Plasma plus use slightly less power but not really enough to make a big issue and life-span wise pretty much the same for all three displays.

All three technologies have their plus and minus points especially in regards to final picture quality although all will perform well with DVD sources. SKY (digital tv as a whole) is slightly more questionable due to the wide range in quality between broadcasters, some are very good and look great on any telly while others are poor and don't make the most of a modern display.
A CRT will to an extent hide most of the defects in a poor broadcast while flat panels which have higher resolutions emphasis these problems.

So you can buy a good CRT at a reasonable price which is unlikely to dissappoint you (unless you need to dust underneath ). However if you are interested in High Definition within the next couple of years then flat panels have a huge advantage but at a price and the fact that they tend to be weaker with standard digital broadcasts.
Jarrak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2005, 19:09
David (2)
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: S.West England.
Posts: 18,037
Pansonic flat panels are the best. I have seen a few lined up against others and Panasonics have the edge I think. The High Def ready Panasonic is the only way to view high def (others are around 20% lower quality in picture terms) , if you want high def signals to be at their very best. Chances are with Sky launching their high def service early next year, there will be a lot more high def ready sets, and at cheaper prices then. Even non-sky users should be aware of this.

Dave
David (2) is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2005, 19:37
mervyn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 317
Thanks each for your replies. My existing Sony Widescreen has a superb picture but I will continue to try and convince my wife that we need a flat panel.
mervyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2005, 22:00
suestorm
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 450
CRT will give you a far superior picture than either plasma or LCD.
But if you want 42" next time,CRT is out.
Both plasma and LCD give poor pix in normal viewing distances and especially with our pretty poor quality digital tv systems.
I would audition both in a shop ,but make sure that you don't get tricked into watching a dvd only demo which will give better pix than digital tv
suestorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2005, 01:16
Caxton
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 24,065
Originally Posted by suestorm
CRT will give you a far superior picture than either plasma or LCD.
But if you want 42" next time,CRT is out.
Both plasma and LCD give poor pix in normal viewing distances and especially with our pretty poor quality digital tv systems.
I would audition both in a shop ,but make sure that you don't get tricked into watching a dvd only demo which will give better pix than digital tv
Excellent advice, particularly the last paragraph. All too often I have seen these demo DVDs played on plasma and LCD screens that look excellent and they are but one must realise these are the very best pictures anyone is likely to see on them, and if you want to watch Sky on plasma or LCD forget in unless you are willing to look at a far inferior picture.

I have yet to see plasma or LCD showing a broadcast picture that even gets anywhere near a CRT for quality either in a store or a person's house. Even TV salesmen and some shop owners have grudgingly admitted to me that there is no equal to a CRT for quality.

I have even had friends boost about the super new plasma TVs they have and they say the picture quality is superb. If thay call the pictures I have seen on them superb then it is more than I do. Though saying that when some have spent in the region of £2000 on one they are hardly going to admit they are crap.

I am shortly due to update my TV and I shall be getting a 67cm 50hz CRT and wait and see in three years if plasma is showing a picture of the quality I would want to watch, then I may buy one but until then I am more than happy with my CRT tvs.
Caxton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2005, 01:47
Jarrak
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ilkeston
Posts: 18,075
Originally Posted by Caxton

I am shortly due to update my TV and I shall be getting a 67cm 50hz CRT and wait and see in three years if plasma is showing a picture of the quality I would want to watch, then I may buy one but until then I am more than happy with my CRT tvs.



In that time frame we will be seeing viable SED and OLED displays which if you believe the blurb have the positives of the current flat panels with non of the negatives and are more than a match for the current generation of CRT's.

If it wasn't for HD then I would have probably not have gone down the LCD or Plasma route (would have bought another CRT RPTV which are dirt cheap), the source material has to be factored in to the equation when buying a TV just as it has been for 4:3 or 16:9 ratio displays.

If you don't want HD and you have a reasonable budget then the very mature CRT market has plenty to offer.
Jarrak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2005, 12:43
ericpode
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 249
I have yet to see plasma or LCD showing a broadcast picture that even gets anywhere near a CRT for quality either in a store or a person's house
I have only seen LCDs in stores, but I must agree. I am always disappointed by the pixelation and posterisation of LCD TVs.

It is quite frustrating because I would love to buy a flat panel NOW but it just can't be justified. CRT still gives a better quality picture.

I was in John lewis yesterday, and the vast majority of medium and large TVs were LCDs and plasma with just a few CRTs - the CRTs were easily better.

They did have two HD demos which for some reason were not labelled as such. Several people commented how crisp the picture was and what a good TV it was but they didn't realise they were watching HD!

One was showing some well lit olde street scenes from what looked like a European city, with shots of cut-glass ornaments etc and that looked superb. The other was showing some shots from London fashion week - a bit dark. less crisp and less obviously HD.

If my TV blew up today I'd still have to go for a CRT.
ericpode is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2005, 12:46
Dan27
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: By The Sea
Posts: 9,574
There are LCDs that cater especially for PAL resolutions and will give an equal quality display to that of CRT.
Dan27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2005, 14:33
suestorm
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 450
Originally Posted by DanVitale
There are LCDs that cater especially for PAL resolutions and will give an equal quality display to that of CRT.
I'll believe that one when I see it
suestorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2005, 15:03
yBSy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,200
suestormBoth plasma and LCD give poor pix in normal viewing distances and especially with our pretty poor quality digital tv systems.
Would it be fair to say analogue television offers DVD quality pictures?

I have heard people in Germany laugh at the picture quality on UK satellite channels. Think they are still used to analogue full bit rate.

I noticed NICAM stereo is 3 times the bit rate of digital TV broadcasts too. Why don't they broadcast at the same bitrate in the digital era???
yBSy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2005, 17:08
ALanJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London
Posts: 2,957
Originally Posted by Caxton
I have yet to see plasma or LCD showing a broadcast picture that even gets anywhere near a CRT for quality either in a store or a person's house. Even TV salesmen and some shop owners have grudgingly admitted to me that there is no equal to a CRT for quality.
I don't disagree with you but most TV showrooms have awful TV displays - the default settings on Plasma and LCDs almost always requires adjustment. Panasonics LCDs come preset with the contrast almost all the way up - great in a bright showroom useless at home.

I would agree that size of size you will generally see a better picture on a CRT and LCD of similar sizes but that isn't what is being discussed here.

If you want a big screen 42" or above you are currently talking plasma or RPTV (and the brightness of these just doesn't hack it for me).

Plasma screens can give excellent results...

Originally Posted by Caxton
I have even had friends boost about the super new plasma TVs they have and they say the picture quality is superb. If thay call the pictures I have seen on them superb then it is more than I do. Though saying that when some have spent in the region of £2000 on one they are hardly going to admit they are crap.
The problem with Plasma displays is that to get down to a price of £1-2,000 corners have to be cut.

I haven't auditioned any displays in this price range and so don't know how well they work but the last time I did I was disappointed. The quality of the up conversion of the Standard Definition signal to the display resolution of many of these devices leads a lot to be desired and this one of the reasons the picture looks so poor.

With a good upscaler there is enough picture information in most (but not all) digital transmissions in the UK. The problem is that many less expensive screens make a pigs ear out of that part of the process.

I have an old 50" pioneer and the picture quality is superb with the correct input - be that DVD or certain programming on Sky or Freeview. Of the live broadcasts I mostly watch Sky and one can't fault the image quality of Sky's movie channels and five's CSI and other US imports that are shot in HD.

I know some people don't see as good results so I can only assume that the display is at fault.

This is an area where there is a reason that some displays are more expensive than others. Of course when HD comes along then this issue of upscaling will be less of an issue as hopefully broadcasters will do it on £100,000 machines in their playout sites and the picture quality is likely to be much better than from the upscaling chipset in a £1500 TV
ALanJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2005, 18:06
sneeks
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 849
Originally Posted by DanVitale
There are LCDs that cater especially for PAL resolutions and will give an equal quality display to that of CRT.
I have bought one of these last week, a Sharp LC32P50E for £795 inc delivery online. Dixons are selling the same TV for £999

The question relating to the life of a LCD or a Plasma TV, you are best not worrying over that. I think they quote 20 years for a plasma and 40 years for a LCD if watched for 4 hours every day. In other words it'll not really be a factor as most people will have replaced them by then
sneeks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2005, 21:02
suestorm
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 450
Originally Posted by vbsx
suestormBoth plasma and LCD give poor pix in normal viewing distances and especially with our pretty poor quality digital tv systems.
Would it be fair to say analogue television offers DVD quality pictures?

I have heard people in Germany laugh at the picture quality on UK satellite channels. Think they are still used to analogue full bit rate.

I noticed NICAM stereo is 3 times the bit rate of digital TV broadcasts too. Why don't they broadcast at the same bitrate in the digital era???
I would say that UK analogue is not as good as dvd's.
I have a motorised satellite system and have watched European digital tv since 1996(2 years before SD started).All other countries have ,or at least appear to have,better quality pix than we do.
Back to the early 90's and the French D2MAC broadcasts of Canal + etc were even better than our current digital broadcasts.To be fair,Freeview offers visibly superior quality over Sky,certainly on the BBC and ITV offerings-particularly noticeable on ITV who's SD broadcasts are especially poor
suestorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2005, 13:32
Glawster2002
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nailsworth, Gloucestershire
Posts: 10,410
Originally Posted by Jarrak
In that time frame we will be seeing viable SED and OLED displays which if you believe the blurb have the positives of the current flat panels with non of the negatives and are more than a match for the current generation of CRT's.

If the hype is to be believed, Surface-conduction Electron-emitter Display (SED) displays, currently being jointly developed by Toshiba & Canon should offer CRT quality, as they work on a similat theory to a CRT, on a flat-panel display and be capable of true HDTV.
Glawster2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2005, 17:09
mervyn
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 317
Hi,
Thank you all for your replies. As my 32" widescreen sony is only 3 years old with a wonderful picture.
I will tell the wife that the decorating will have to wait a couple of years until I can be sure of a wonderful flat panel.
mervyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2005, 22:40
Nick Diamond
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 435
Mervyn

I'm glad you've seen sense in keeping your 32'' Sony widescreen after reading some sensible comments on these overpriced flat panel TV's. Anyone who spends over £500 quid for a television to watch the mind numbing crap thats been thrown up on TV these day's are just pure crackpots without a clue.
Nick Diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2005, 08:53
MIsguidedFool
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 409
Originally Posted by David (2)
Pansonic flat panels are the best. I have seen a few lined up against others and Panasonics have the edge I think. The High Def ready Panasonic is the only way to view high def (others are around 20% lower quality in picture terms) , if you want high def signals to be at their very best. Chances are with Sky launching their high def service early next year, there will be a lot more high def ready sets, and at cheaper prices then. Even non-sky users should be aware of this.

Dave
I can second that.

A friend of mine works for a retailer and they had to put all the Panasonics in a separate room from the rest of the flat panels as only the Panasonics were selling.

Unfortunately I paid the price of being an early adopter of plasma, and mine isn't HD ready. Still, it has a superb picture and until free HD broadcasts come about in 2012, there isn't much point in upgrading yet for me.

Regards

MF
MIsguidedFool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2005, 14:46
David (2)
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: S.West England.
Posts: 18,037
I do still think CRT has a good picture, and provided you put a good signal in, you get a good picture, almost regardless of what make you of set you have. But LCD and Plasma's can be as good, if you buy a good set. The Panasonics I have seen are very good. I even stood at arms length to one of them, and the "digital" picture was identical to CRT. Only very slight blocking , and I mean "slight" - most people would not even see it, and CRT's showing digital broadcasts will display it too, if you look close up.

The issue is that not all Plasma's and LCD's are as good as that, although all have got much better compared with the early sets a few years ago. But even so, you need to be very selective when you buy one of these, whereas on CRT technology the difference between brands is much less.

Dave
David (2) is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2005, 16:09
JimRockford
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: London
Posts: 2,989
Originally Posted by Nick Diamond

Anyone who spends over £500 quid for a television to watch the mind numbing crap thats been thrown up on TV these day's are just pure crackpots without a clue.
It might shock you to learn about DVD, and the ability to watch whatever film you want, without having to rely on what is broadcast on TV.
JimRockford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2005, 16:23
partridge
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 730
With a bit of time and perseverance you can get a Plasma to show Freeview at a fantastic quality. I have; my 32" Hitachi looks great showing Freeview, and now I am able to connect my PS2 and DVD via component cables they look better than they ever did on my old CRT. I can even plug my PC in, if I really wanted to - Broadband tv perhaps!

Anyway, I consider myself fussy, but I'm more than happy with regular tv (which will get better as time goes by, better compression, etc) and delighted with games and movies. Roll on next year when I can hook up a PS3 and enjoy HD games and movies.

Aside from that, the space saved is immense and I no longer need a scart switch box, as every device has its own separate connection.

Flat panels aren't just about HD tv, they have a lot of other advantages over CRT, and as I said above, you can get a great tv picture by careful adjustment of the display settings.
partridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2005, 10:12
partridge
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 730
Have since discovered that I can set the brightness, contrast and colour independently for each input, which is particularly useful as I always found games were a bit dark, but I had to put up with it as I didn't want to mess up my regular tv settings. Now I can set my games separately from DVD and tv.
partridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2005, 10:17
Dan27
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: By The Sea
Posts: 9,574
Originally Posted by Nick Diamond
Anyone who spends over £500 quid for a television to watch the mind numbing crap thats been thrown up on TV these day's are just pure crackpots without a clue.
Each for his own. We'll just leave you to you wireless and your ovaltine
Dan27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2005, 22:02
shown73
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 7
Having taken the plunge with one of Aldi's £999 plasma sets, there is no going back. I had a Sony 100hz widescreen, but I wouldn't want to go back, ever. 42" plasma is now hung on the wall, room seems much bigger, picture is superb, albeit sound is crap untill I can get a decent amp and speakers.
You get used to the size so quickly, even in a small room it is by no means overpowering, quite the opposite. Nothing in life is perfect, but I'm very happy.
shown73 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 16:50.