Plasma is dying because the American consumer is uninformed (and stupid in general). Its a better quality product (black levels, brightness is now equivalent, viewing angles, picture quality, I could go on). Its cheaper for manufacturers to produce lcd (led) on mass levels than plasma. I own 3 high end plasma TVs and one mid range LED (office corner mount), and everyone asks why my entertainment systems look so much better. I have recommended plasma to many people and they all immediately converted. It's just another dying market like high end audio and high end desktop computing. As society gets dumber educated folks get screwed.
- Status
nicodemus_mm
Distinguished
- Mar 10, 2009
- 43
- 0
- 18,580
Guess it's about time to buy a couple more plasmas. I've had two for a few years now. No burn-in after years of console gaming and no other complaints. It seems that on average LCD is cheaper, but the image has never suited my tastes.
I was sad to see Pioneer stop making the Kuro and Elite lines. I will be sad to see Panasonic stop making plasmas as well, but I will buy plasma until LCD has a product I like that doesn't cost $6k.
I was sad to see Pioneer stop making the Kuro and Elite lines. I will be sad to see Panasonic stop making plasmas as well, but I will buy plasma until LCD has a product I like that doesn't cost $6k.
"Pioneer elite and pioneer elite kuros made in 2007 and 2008, are still the best consumer tvs ever produced in terms if quality and that's 5 year old plasma tech, and no TV has yet to match them."
True up until recently---I believe CNET found that the new Panny ST series has overall slightly better picture quality. Not a bad run though---5 years is an absolute eternity in the tech world.
True up until recently---I believe CNET found that the new Panny ST series has overall slightly better picture quality. Not a bad run though---5 years is an absolute eternity in the tech world.
bigpoppastuke
Distinguished
- Apr 14, 2009
- 25
- 0
- 18,580
The ONLY benefit to owning a LCD is power consumption, weight and brightness. I blame this on the manufacturers for not informing the public on the benefits of Plasma over LCD. I see it on some of the comments in this topic even. There is literally no literature in stores explaining the Pros and Cons to either. This really is a sad day for TV quality enthusiasts.
Burn in hasn't been around since the first couple generations of Plasma. You find me a new plasma that has burn in and I'll call you a liar.
Burn in hasn't been around since the first couple generations of Plasma. You find me a new plasma that has burn in and I'll call you a liar.
bigpoppastuke
Distinguished
- Apr 14, 2009
- 25
- 0
- 18,580
Another thing, all these retail stores are messing with the image settings on the TV's with lower margins so they can push you onto the supposedly "better" looking screen in order to receive higher commission and sales numbers. LCD's have a higher margin. Next time you buy a TV, ask for the remote control and look at the settings, You'll know what I'm talking about then.
bigpoppastuke
Distinguished
- Apr 14, 2009
- 25
- 0
- 18,580
@hasten
I think you meant someone else... I completely agree with you. I actually up voted you now
I think you meant someone else... I completely agree with you. I actually up voted you now
spectrewind
Distinguished
- Mar 25, 2009
- 194
- 0
- 18,630
Just a consumer review here...
I think Panasonic did it right...
I have two 55" Viera TVs. ST30 + ST50. With one exception, have been quite happy with both. And I love my ST50. Both do 3D, kinda cool for nVidia's 3D gaming utility over the DVI-D to HDMI pass thru.
The only exception being that the NetFlix app on the ST30 is no longer updated, but easy to work around.
I think Panasonic did it right...
I have two 55" Viera TVs. ST30 + ST50. With one exception, have been quite happy with both. And I love my ST50. Both do 3D, kinda cool for nVidia's 3D gaming utility over the DVI-D to HDMI pass thru.
The only exception being that the NetFlix app on the ST30 is no longer updated, but easy to work around.
althaz
Distinguished
- Aug 23, 2006
- 3
- 0
- 18,510
"Even though they've made improvements in the area with plasma screens, burn-in has always been the major deterrent. Why worry when you don't have to? As LCD/LEDs have come down in price and provide great pictures even compared to plasma while using far less power, people are passing on plasma altogether. "
Burn in is impossible on any reasonably modern Korean TV (eg: Samsung or LG), Panasonics can still in theory suffer from burn in, but only if you try to do it when the TV is brand new.
LCDs (and "LED"s) are NOT comparable in terms of picture quality when you compare the best of each, the problem is any low-end plasmas tend to look truly bad, whereas with LCDs there's a much smaller gap between the best and worst TVs. This has always been the problem with plasma TVs, only the very best ones have ever looked half-decent, hence there has never been any real variety in what you can purchase.
If you want a great TV, a top of the line Plasma is the only possible option, but if you just want "a TV", LCD gives you a plethora of options in terms of brand, size and quality that Plasma just can't match. That makes LCD more popular which in turn helps sell the top end models, despite them being quite attrocious compared to the best plasmas.
Burn in is impossible on any reasonably modern Korean TV (eg: Samsung or LG), Panasonics can still in theory suffer from burn in, but only if you try to do it when the TV is brand new.
LCDs (and "LED"s) are NOT comparable in terms of picture quality when you compare the best of each, the problem is any low-end plasmas tend to look truly bad, whereas with LCDs there's a much smaller gap between the best and worst TVs. This has always been the problem with plasma TVs, only the very best ones have ever looked half-decent, hence there has never been any real variety in what you can purchase.
If you want a great TV, a top of the line Plasma is the only possible option, but if you just want "a TV", LCD gives you a plethora of options in terms of brand, size and quality that Plasma just can't match. That makes LCD more popular which in turn helps sell the top end models, despite them being quite attrocious compared to the best plasmas.
althaz
Distinguished
- Aug 23, 2006
- 3
- 0
- 18,510
"Even though they've made improvements in the area with plasma screens, burn-in has always been the major deterrent. Why worry when you don't have to? As LCD/LEDs have come down in price and provide great pictures even compared to plasma while using far less power, people are passing on plasma altogether. "
Burn in is impossible on any reasonably modern Korean TV (eg: Samsung or LG), Panasonics can still in theory suffer from burn in, but only if you try to do it when the TV is brand new.
LCDs (and "LED"s) are NOT comparable in terms of picture quality when you compare the best of each, the problem is any low-end plasmas tend to look truly bad, whereas with LCDs there's a much smaller gap between the best and worst TVs. This has always been the problem with plasma TVs, only the very best ones have ever looked half-decent, hence there has never been any real variety in what you can purchase.
If you want a great TV, a top of the line Plasma is the only possible option, but if you just want "a TV", LCD gives you a plethora of options in terms of brand, size and quality that Plasma just can't match. That makes LCD more popular which in turn helps sell the top end models, despite them being quite attrocious compared to the best plasmas.
Burn in is impossible on any reasonably modern Korean TV (eg: Samsung or LG), Panasonics can still in theory suffer from burn in, but only if you try to do it when the TV is brand new.
LCDs (and "LED"s) are NOT comparable in terms of picture quality when you compare the best of each, the problem is any low-end plasmas tend to look truly bad, whereas with LCDs there's a much smaller gap between the best and worst TVs. This has always been the problem with plasma TVs, only the very best ones have ever looked half-decent, hence there has never been any real variety in what you can purchase.
If you want a great TV, a top of the line Plasma is the only possible option, but if you just want "a TV", LCD gives you a plethora of options in terms of brand, size and quality that Plasma just can't match. That makes LCD more popular which in turn helps sell the top end models, despite them being quite attrocious compared to the best plasmas.
Disagree, it's not that lowend plasmas didn't have variety or were that much worse than top end plasmas. Lowend plasmas picture quality is still significantly better than comparable lcd/led. The problem is a size issue, because, producing panel sizes for plasma less than 40" is cost prohibitive most people simply didn't buy plasmas unless it was for the living room TV. And since the 19"-40" range is a huge TV segment people simply became accustomed to buying lcd/led. They didn't do research. The fact that even people here commenting think that burn-in is still an issue, a problem that was solved almost a decade ago shows this.
Also, the fact that people don't know that even today Plasma has a significant picture quality lead shows that people don't do research. Simply put Plasma is a better tech in terms of pure picture quality and in plasma vs lcd hey day, they were comparable in thinness and weight. Only recently, with more manufacturers putting effort into their led/lcd lineup has the thickness difference been an issue, but honestly, we are talking 2.0" vs 1.5", who cares at that point, both are still sitting flat on my wall. But simply put in terms of picture quality which is the ultimate point of your TV, plasma is still superior by a good bit.
Also, the fact that people don't know that even today Plasma has a significant picture quality lead shows that people don't do research. Simply put Plasma is a better tech in terms of pure picture quality and in plasma vs lcd hey day, they were comparable in thinness and weight. Only recently, with more manufacturers putting effort into their led/lcd lineup has the thickness difference been an issue, but honestly, we are talking 2.0" vs 1.5", who cares at that point, both are still sitting flat on my wall. But simply put in terms of picture quality which is the ultimate point of your TV, plasma is still superior by a good bit.
Just went from a 42" plasma to a.... 50" plasma. Panasonic Viera, funnily enough. Unlike many consumers, price and quality are both driving decisions for me, and plasmas win in both respects, I feel.
I will be sad to see these go because I'm not sure what I could get that would match the performance well enough.
I will be sad to see these go because I'm not sure what I could get that would match the performance well enough.
Pioneer Kuro Plasma - the best bar none. I have had my 50" model for some years now and it is amazing - definitely turns the heads when visitors see it. The end of production is no bad thing though - we all know that OLED is going to destroy everything in terms of image quality so now is a good time for them to stop production of plasma.
burkhartmj
Honorable
- Aug 31, 2012
- 14
- 0
- 10,560
Maybe I'm missing something, but at least on Amazon a 46 inch 720p plasma is the same price as my 47 inch 1080p LED/LCD TV. My previous roommate had a plasma, and while the picture was great, the thing was heavy and hot and used up loads of electricity. The LCD TV I have now looks pretty much just as good while being lighter, thinner, and more efficient.
Why? Because most people are pretty much ignorant of what they are buying and go for what looks the brightest (lowest common denominator of picture quality in a store setting).
Anyone who researches what they are buying and knows jack squat would pick a Plasma over a LED/LCD if they were buying for the actual picture quality and experience.
I did my research when buying my home theater screen (not equipped for a projector) and went Plasma. It absolutely annihilates every LED/LCD in the house when watching movies.
That said there are still areas where LED/LCD is better.
Image retention is still a reality on Plasmas (I know first hand) and while its not permanent it still takes a while to get rid of images. So if you watch alot of ESPN, CNN (things with fixed tickers on screen), or channels with huge bright logos, LED/LCD may be a better choice.
If your TV is an a room where the sun shines directly on the screen LED/LCD will be better.
Anyone who researches what they are buying and knows jack squat would pick a Plasma over a LED/LCD if they were buying for the actual picture quality and experience.
I did my research when buying my home theater screen (not equipped for a projector) and went Plasma. It absolutely annihilates every LED/LCD in the house when watching movies.
That said there are still areas where LED/LCD is better.
Image retention is still a reality on Plasmas (I know first hand) and while its not permanent it still takes a while to get rid of images. So if you watch alot of ESPN, CNN (things with fixed tickers on screen), or channels with huge bright logos, LED/LCD may be a better choice.
If your TV is an a room where the sun shines directly on the screen LED/LCD will be better.
@ddpruitt
As a 47" Toshiba LCD 120Hz (~4 years old) user I have to disagree with you (Oh it too heats up my room good too).
Plasmas have the following attributes that make them better in my opinion:
-600Hz refresh rate
-Glass screens (not a bit deal until your little one decides to bang on the screen, then you'll appreciate the glass)
-great viewing angles
-the blackest blacks
-more natural color
-cheaper price
With regard to your comment on why Betamax died. Did you know that the adult entertainment industry decided to not release there videos on that system? This along with other issues contributed to it's demise.
As a 47" Toshiba LCD 120Hz (~4 years old) user I have to disagree with you (Oh it too heats up my room good too).
Plasmas have the following attributes that make them better in my opinion:
-600Hz refresh rate
-Glass screens (not a bit deal until your little one decides to bang on the screen, then you'll appreciate the glass)
-great viewing angles
-the blackest blacks
-more natural color
-cheaper price
With regard to your comment on why Betamax died. Did you know that the adult entertainment industry decided to not release there videos on that system? This along with other issues contributed to it's demise.
@ddpruitt
As a 47" Toshiba LCD 120Hz (~4 years old) user I have to disagree with you (Oh it too heats up my room good too).
Plasmas have the following attributes that make them better in my opinion:
-600Hz refresh rate
-Glass screens (not a bit deal until your little one decides to bang on the screen, then you'll appreciate the glass)
-great viewing angles
-the blackest blacks
-more natural color
-cheaper price
With regard to your comment on why Betamax died. Did you know that the adult entertainment industry decided to not release there videos on that system? This along with other issues contributed to it's demise.
As a 47" Toshiba LCD 120Hz (~4 years old) user I have to disagree with you (Oh it too heats up my room good too).
Plasmas have the following attributes that make them better in my opinion:
-600Hz refresh rate
-Glass screens (not a bit deal until your little one decides to bang on the screen, then you'll appreciate the glass)
-great viewing angles
-the blackest blacks
-more natural color
-cheaper price
With regard to your comment on why Betamax died. Did you know that the adult entertainment industry decided to not release there videos on that system? This along with other issues contributed to it's demise.
@ddpruitt
As a 47" Toshiba LCD 120Hz (~4 years old) user I have to disagree with you (Oh it too heats up my room good too).
Plasmas have the following attributes that make them better in my opinion:
-600Hz refresh rate
-Glass screens (not a bit deal until your little one decides to bang on the screen, then you'll appreciate the glass)
-great viewing angles
-the blackest blacks
-more natural color
-cheaper price
With regard to your comment on why Betamax died. Did you know that the adult entertainment industry decided to not release there videos on that system? This along with other issues contributed to it's demise.
As a 47" Toshiba LCD 120Hz (~4 years old) user I have to disagree with you (Oh it too heats up my room good too).
Plasmas have the following attributes that make them better in my opinion:
-600Hz refresh rate
-Glass screens (not a bit deal until your little one decides to bang on the screen, then you'll appreciate the glass)
-great viewing angles
-the blackest blacks
-more natural color
-cheaper price
With regard to your comment on why Betamax died. Did you know that the adult entertainment industry decided to not release there videos on that system? This along with other issues contributed to it's demise.
NorthericToPostWit
Honorable
- Oct 10, 2013
- 1
- 0
- 10,510
LCDs are price competitive with plasmas up to 42 inch, after that they become very expensive. A 50+ inch LCD is easily 2-3x the cost of a plasma.
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Why are windows laptop cameras so bad compared to other's?
- Started by bakriwa5
- Replies: 2
-
Discussion What new phone technology trends should we keep an eye on?- Started by Vandna Jadhav
- Replies: 2
-
Question Best laptops for a student going to high school
- Started by joninte2
- Replies: 2
-
Question What if the EU forced laptop makers to allow upgradeable ram and storage?
- Started by kionbo2
- Replies: 2
-
-
Question Which games are you playing right now please suggest me some- Started by happyclub
- Replies: 8
Facebook
Twitter