Curry's Plasma statement versus LCD?

SeaviewHome · 19-02-2008, 17:37

Taken from Curry's website

BUYERS GUIDE

Plasma TVs have the ability to reproduce the deepest blacks and as a result have high contrast ratios, the measure of the blackest black compared to the whitest white. Panasonic, perhaps the market leader for plasma TVs, has impressive contrast ratios of up to 10000:1 for exceptionally black blacks. Plasmas also can keep up with a fast moving object like a football better than LCD, so that the ball’s motion will look crisper and more detailed, hence more natural.

LCDs deliver even and brighter images, making them ideal for very brightly-lit rooms.

http://www.currys.co.uk/martprd/edit...s_Buyers_Guide

Do people agree that these are fair statements?

timmillwood · 19-02-2008, 18:31

Yes, Fair, not 100%.

It does depend on the make and model not just if it's LCD or Plasma.

JohnD2000 · 19-02-2008, 18:33

More or less, yes. It's certainly true of my plasma and LCD TV's. Admittedly, though, the LCD was less than half the price of the plasma.

reddog1234 · 20-02-2008, 11:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeaviewHome

Do people agree that these are fair statements?

Yes if you read it a couple of years ago.

I think its not that case that you need to stand in front of the TV and pick the one you like.

Motion blur should be a thing of the past and plasmas seem very bright these days (even when viewed in brightly lit shops).

Only thing I would say is that sometimes LCD can sometimes look a little harsh (being big computer monitors) and show up compression defects more.

Price difference seems to be getting less by the minute as well.

late8 · 20-02-2008, 11:47

It surprised me how bright and clear LCD's are now compared to Plasma. They have come along way in recent years.

Plasma whites (even Pioneer) seem greeny and not as solid as LCD. The LCD screens non reflective quality also helps.- LCD Still blurs and still have inky blacks but some are very very good now.

True Colours · 20-02-2008, 12:05

We have a 50" Philips Plasma and we think its fab

w3dal · 20-02-2008, 12:33

i agree especially about the sport comment.

im still yet to see an LCD produce a better SD picture when watching football on sky sports.

Dal

BallroomBear · 22-02-2008, 17:19

The Curry's statement is way off the mark in many repsects. Pansonic, while being near the top of the pile for plasma quality are certainly not the best. Pioneer are much better, their Kuro range having contrast ratios of 60000:1 on some of the higher spec models.

I've yet to see an LCD tv which doesn't have motion blur when showing sports. The quality of Sky Sports' broadcast is so poor because Murdoch compresses the life out the signal that you're unlikely to ever find either an LCD or plasma which shows the signal better than a CRT.

My Pioneer is head and shoulders above any LCD I saw and tested, particularly with Freeview and SD DVD.

SeaviewHome · 22-02-2008, 18:56

Yes the Kuro range look very good. Mind you at £1400+ they should be.

BallroomBear · 22-02-2008, 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeaviewHome

Yes the Kuro range look very good. Mind you at £1400+ they should be.

I think we've exemplified the well known point that if you want quality, you have to pay for it. I think the Kuro range go to around £3000 for a 60" plasma. But with Pioneer you do get what you pay for in spades.

I know prices have dropped radically in the last few months, but no 42" or bigger plasma/LCD (not that I'd ever buy an LCD at that screen size) priced between £600-£800 is going to be much good, at least not when showing SD input.

Chris Frost · 24-02-2008, 04:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by BallroomBear

The Curry's statement is way off the mark in many repsects. Pansonic, while being near the top of the pile for plasma quality are certainly not the best.

That's not what the Currys quote said. It said...

Quote:

Panasonic, perhaps the market leader for plasma TVs,

which I think is purposely vague. The metric could be volume sold, in which case Pana would outsell Pioneer at 10:1. So it would be accurate for Currys to describe them as market leader in that respect.

I agree that the Pioneer products are very good. Fujitsu is better, but sadly they are pulling out of Plasma manufacturing in March. (No, they're not going in to LCD).

As for the rest of the statement I think it's about right. Contrast figures are pretty much meaningless without knowing how those measurements were taken. Plasma still produces the blackest blacks; for the simple reason that it's not possible for LCD to switch of its backlight in normal operation so there'll always be some residual illumination even on a black picture. Plasma doesn't have this problem.

For white output and overall image brightness then LCD wins; so again the Currys statement is accurate.

Motion smear is still a problem with LCD. The reaction time of LCD pixels is still measured in milliseconds (1/1000) whereas plasma pixels respond in microseconds (1/1000000) or in other words plasma pixels respond 1000 times faster. It's not quite that simple of course. Phosphor pixels still glow after the energising cell is switched off. LCD pixel response times are measured grey to grey, when they perform quickest, but that speed doesn't necessarily translate to a watchable picture.

Regards

Clangerette · 24-02-2008, 11:03

Oh dear, I've found a full HD LCD with a 15000:1 contrast ratio which I was all set to buy, I didn't want plasma because of the burn-in issue and the power consumption but after reading this I don't know what to do!!!

Nigel Goodwin · 24-02-2008, 11:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clangerette

Oh dear, I've found a full HD LCD with a 15000:1 contrast ratio which I was all set to buy, I didn't want plasma because of the burn-in issue and the power consumption but after reading this I don't know what to do!!!

Go and look at it, and see if you're happy with it - good quality LCD's are perfectly fine.

Don't get too carried away with contrast ratios though, there's no common standard for measuring it - so a 5000/1 set may be better than a 15000/1. So ignore the figures, and check the picture out yourself - on both SD and HD.

meltcity · 24-02-2008, 15:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clangerette

Oh dear, I've found a full HD LCD with a 15000:1 contrast ratio which I was all set to buy, I didn't want plasma because of the burn-in issue and the power consumption but after reading this I don't know what to do!!!

What is your budget? Is Panasonic's PZ70 Full HD plasma within your price range or are you after something cheaper? If you require Full HD and you can't afford the Panasonic then LCD is your only option anyway. Not much to get confused about.

Clangerette · 24-02-2008, 17:30

Thanx both, think I'll stick with my original decision now!

19-02-2008, 17:37	#1
SeaviewHome Banned User Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,386	Curry's Plasma statement versus LCD? Taken from Curry's website BUYERS GUIDE Plasma TVs have the ability to reproduce the deepest blacks and as a result have high contrast ratios, the measure of the blackest black compared to the whitest white. Panasonic, perhaps the market leader for plasma TVs, has impressive contrast ratios of up to 10000:1 for exceptionally black blacks. Plasmas also can keep up with a fast moving object like a football better than LCD, so that the ball’s motion will look crisper and more detailed, hence more natural. LCDs deliver even and brighter images, making them ideal for very brightly-lit rooms. http://www.currys.co.uk/martprd/edit...s_Buyers_Guide Do people agree that these are fair statements?

19-02-2008, 18:31	#2
timmillwood Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 631	Yes, Fair, not 100%. It does depend on the make and model not just if it's LCD or Plasma.

19-02-2008, 18:33	#3
JohnD2000 Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: London Posts: 1,292	More or less, yes. It's certainly true of my plasma and LCD TV's. Admittedly, though, the LCD was less than half the price of the plasma.

20-02-2008, 11:33	#4
reddog1234 Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: South East UK Posts: 2,096	Quote: Originally Posted by SeaviewHome Do people agree that these are fair statements? Yes if you read it a couple of years ago. I think its not that case that you need to stand in front of the TV and pick the one you like. Motion blur should be a thing of the past and plasmas seem very bright these days (even when viewed in brightly lit shops). Only thing I would say is that sometimes LCD can sometimes look a little harsh (being big computer monitors) and show up compression defects more. Price difference seems to be getting less by the minute as well.

20-02-2008, 11:47	#5
late8 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 7,052	It surprised me how bright and clear LCD's are now compared to Plasma. They have come along way in recent years. Plasma whites (even Pioneer) seem greeny and not as solid as LCD. The LCD screens non reflective quality also helps.- LCD Still blurs and still have inky blacks but some are very very good now.

20-02-2008, 12:05	#6
True Colours Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Scotland Posts: 301	We have a 50" Philips Plasma and we think its fab

20-02-2008, 12:33	#7
w3dal Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: /system/share/w3dal Posts: 315	i agree especially about the sport comment. im still yet to see an LCD produce a better SD picture when watching football on sky sports. Dal

22-02-2008, 17:19	#8
BallroomBear Banned User Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 539	The Curry's statement is way off the mark in many repsects. Pansonic, while being near the top of the pile for plasma quality are certainly not the best. Pioneer are much better, their Kuro range having contrast ratios of 60000:1 on some of the higher spec models. I've yet to see an LCD tv which doesn't have motion blur when showing sports. The quality of Sky Sports' broadcast is so poor because Murdoch compresses the life out the signal that you're unlikely to ever find either an LCD or plasma which shows the signal better than a CRT. My Pioneer is head and shoulders above any LCD I saw and tested, particularly with Freeview and SD DVD.

22-02-2008, 18:56	#9
SeaviewHome Banned User Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,386	Yes the Kuro range look very good. Mind you at £1400+ they should be.

22-02-2008, 19:20	#10
BallroomBear Banned User Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 539	Quote: Originally Posted by SeaviewHome Yes the Kuro range look very good. Mind you at £1400+ they should be. I think we've exemplified the well known point that if you want quality, you have to pay for it. I think the Kuro range go to around £3000 for a 60" plasma. But with Pioneer you do get what you pay for in spades. I know prices have dropped radically in the last few months, but no 42" or bigger plasma/LCD (not that I'd ever buy an LCD at that screen size) priced between £600-£800 is going to be much good, at least not when showing SD input.

24-02-2008, 04:51	#11
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	Quote: Originally Posted by BallroomBear The Curry's statement is way off the mark in many repsects. Pansonic, while being near the top of the pile for plasma quality are certainly not the best. That's not what the Currys quote said. It said... Quote: Panasonic, perhaps the market leader for plasma TVs, which I think is purposely vague. The metric could be volume sold, in which case Pana would outsell Pioneer at 10:1. So it would be accurate for Currys to describe them as market leader in that respect. I agree that the Pioneer products are very good. Fujitsu is better, but sadly they are pulling out of Plasma manufacturing in March. (No, they're not going in to LCD). As for the rest of the statement I think it's about right. Contrast figures are pretty much meaningless without knowing how those measurements were taken. Plasma still produces the blackest blacks; for the simple reason that it's not possible for LCD to switch of its backlight in normal operation so there'll always be some residual illumination even on a black picture. Plasma doesn't have this problem. For white output and overall image brightness then LCD wins; so again the Currys statement is accurate. Motion smear is still a problem with LCD. The reaction time of LCD pixels is still measured in milliseconds (1/1000) whereas plasma pixels respond in microseconds (1/1000000) or in other words plasma pixels respond 1000 times faster. It's not quite that simple of course. Phosphor pixels still glow after the energising cell is switched off. LCD pixel response times are measured grey to grey, when they perform quickest, but that speed doesn't necessarily translate to a watchable picture. Regards

24-02-2008, 11:03	#12
Clangerette Forum Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 829	Oh dear, I've found a full HD LCD with a 15000:1 contrast ratio which I was all set to buy, I didn't want plasma because of the burn-in issue and the power consumption but after reading this I don't know what to do!!!

24-02-2008, 11:13	#13
Nigel Goodwin Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: North Derbyshire Posts: 41,789	Quote: Originally Posted by Clangerette Oh dear, I've found a full HD LCD with a 15000:1 contrast ratio which I was all set to buy, I didn't want plasma because of the burn-in issue and the power consumption but after reading this I don't know what to do!!! Go and look at it, and see if you're happy with it - good quality LCD's are perfectly fine. Don't get too carried away with contrast ratios though, there's no common standard for measuring it - so a 5000/1 set may be better than a 15000/1. So ignore the figures, and check the picture out yourself - on both SD and HD.

24-02-2008, 15:20	#14
meltcity Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 1,770	Quote: Originally Posted by Clangerette Oh dear, I've found a full HD LCD with a 15000:1 contrast ratio which I was all set to buy, I didn't want plasma because of the burn-in issue and the power consumption but after reading this I don't know what to do!!! What is your budget? Is Panasonic's PZ70 Full HD plasma within your price range or are you after something cheaper? If you require Full HD and you can't afford the Panasonic then LCD is your only option anyway. Not much to get confused about.

24-02-2008, 17:30	#15
Clangerette Forum Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 829	Thanx both, think I'll stick with my original decision now!

DS Forums

Curry's Plasma statement versus LCD?