why would ANYONE buy plasma

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

For example, looking at the Sony website, a 50 inch plasma is way more than
twice the price of a 50 inch LCD projector, is wider and weighs more. And it
has the burn problem as well. Since the picture quality of the LCD is
spectacular on HD, I can't imagine the plasma could be noticeably better.
The newest LCD is plenty bright enough for a normal room. The only
advantage of the plasma I can see is that it is thinner, but the LCD is only
a little over a foot thick anyway. Is there something else I'm missing?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

It's sexy.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Compared to LCD RP tvs from my very subjective eyes...

Picture and colors are more vivid on plasma, fast motion scenes are
better on plasma, no screen door effect/scan line look,

Plasma can hang on wall and has much more WAF appeal than a 1 foot deep
TV.

Friend's WOW factor is much more with a plasma 😉


--
sampatterson
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message was posted via http/www.satelliteguys.us by sampatterson

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Ahh!!

You should have seen the Last Samurai in HD last night
on my 50 7uy. I couldn't move for the entire movie.

Best investment I ever made.


"Dave Gower" <davegow.removethis@magma.ca> wrote in message
news😱aKdnUo7UO40YivcRVn-iw@magma.ca...
> For example, looking at the Sony website, a 50 inch plasma is way more
than
> twice the price of a 50 inch LCD projector, is wider and weighs more. And
it
> has the burn problem as well. Since the picture quality of the LCD is
> spectacular on HD, I can't imagine the plasma could be noticeably better.
> The newest LCD is plenty bright enough for a normal room. The only
> advantage of the plasma I can see is that it is thinner, but the LCD is
only
> a little over a foot thick anyway. Is there something else I'm missing?
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:20:46 -0500, "Dave Gower"
<davegow.removethis@magma.ca> wrote:

>For example, looking at the Sony website, a 50 inch plasma is way more than
>twice the price of a 50 inch LCD projector, is wider and weighs more.

And it is significantly thinner.

> And it has the burn problem as well.

Only for the careless, irresponsible or infantile.

>Since the picture quality of the LCD is
>spectacular on HD, I can't imagine the plasma could be noticeably better.

It is. And it is better over a wider range of viewing angles.

>The newest LCD is plenty bright enough for a normal room. The only
>advantage of the plasma I can see is that it is thinner, but the LCD is only
>a little over a foot thick anyway. Is there something else I'm missing?

That thickness prevents it from being simply hung on a wall bracket
and, therefore, demands room real estate for a supporting cabinet.
Also, both the LCDRPTV and the cabinet impose a severe penalty
in terms of audio reproduction for those who are fastidious about it.

Otherwise, fine. I plan on getting an LCDRPTV for my den.

Kal

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Dave Gower wrote:
> For example, looking at the Sony website, a 50 inch plasma is way more than
> twice the price of a 50 inch LCD projector, is wider and weighs more. And it
> has the burn problem as well. Since the picture quality of the LCD is
> spectacular on HD, I can't imagine the plasma could be noticeably better.
> The newest LCD is plenty bright enough for a normal room. The only
> advantage of the plasma I can see is that it is thinner, but the LCD is only
> a little over a foot thick anyway. Is there something else I'm missing?

The Sony LCD RP (Rear Projection) TVs are pretty good. But the plasma
offers over the LCD RPTV: no motion smear, better black levels, wider
viewing angle with no sweet spot limitations, more vivid looking through
a window effect picture, no $250 to $400 bulb to replace every few years
(assuming 4000 to 6000 hours per bulb before it gets too dim to use).

Con: burn-in is a concern, but the newer generation plasmas from the
Japanese brands (and presumably the others are catching up) are much
improved in this area. Most of those who have a plasma for 2 to 3 years
report that burn-in has not been a problem, but they took care to avoid
putting a frozen image on the screen for many hours on end. If playing
computer games on the TV is going to be the main use, then either the
new 7 gen Panasonic plasmas, direct view LCD, or LCD or DLP RP TV are
the better choices. CRT RPTV are most definitely prone to burn-in.

I assume you are looking the weight specs for the Sony 50XS955 which
is an excellent plasma set, but the XS955 series are on the heavy side
for plasma TVs. The XS955 models have a built-in subwoofer on the back
which adds to the total weight. However the Sony are not designed to be
lightweight plasmas, for example the 50" Pioneer 5040 is much lighter at
83 lbs with an external AVC box.

I have spent way too time much since January of this year researching
which HD TV to get, learning about the tradeoffs between the various
display technology and brands, and waiting for prices to fall. I just
ordered a Panasonic 7UY 42" commercial plasma as I have an audio/video
receiver setup & cable and don't need all the connectors & built-in
speakers.

Alan Figgatt

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Why would anyone buy projector? How can one compare a back projected image
which may be big but surely very bad to images on CRT's, Plasma's, or LCD
monitors. Projector TV's are inherently inferior in image quality!
Projectors represent a dead end in TV technology!

"Dave Gower" <davegow.removethis@magma.ca> wrote in message
news😱aKdnUo7UO40YivcRVn-iw@magma.ca...
> For example, looking at the Sony website, a 50 inch plasma is way more
> than
> twice the price of a 50 inch LCD projector, is wider and weighs more. And
> it
> has the burn problem as well. Since the picture quality of the LCD is
> spectacular on HD, I can't imagine the plasma could be noticeably better.
> The newest LCD is plenty bright enough for a normal room. The only
> advantage of the plasma I can see is that it is thinner, but the LCD is
> only
> a little over a foot thick anyway. Is there something else I'm missing?
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"lotus" <tohuva@bohu.com> wrote
<...How can one compare a back projected image
> which may be big but surely very bad to images on CRT's, Plasma's, or LCD
> monitors.

"Very bad"? Wow, either my eyes must need checking or we have been into
different showrooms.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

X-No-archive: yes

"Dave Gower" <davegow.removethis@magma.ca> wrote in message
news😱aKdnUo7UO40YivcRVn-iw@magma.ca...
> For example, looking at the Sony website, a 50 inch plasma is way more
> than
> twice the price of a 50 inch LCD projector, is wider and weighs more. And
> it
> has the burn problem as well. Since the picture quality of the LCD is
> spectacular on HD
==============================
Actually, it is lousy!
Have you watched any HD on one?
The pixelization and blurring of motion makes me sea sick.

CRT RPTV still beats them all (except FP CRT)
===============================


>: I can't imagine the plasma could be noticeably better.
> The newest LCD is plenty bright enough for a normal room. The only
> advantage of the plasma I can see is that it is thinner, but the LCD is
> only
> a little over a foot thick anyway. Is there something else I'm missing?
>
========================
Yes..the blurring motion on the LCD

 

[jeremy]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Kalman Rubinson wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:20:46 -0500, "Dave Gower"
> <davegow.removethis@magma.ca> wrote:
>
> >For example, looking at the Sony website, a 50 inch plasma is way
more than
> >twice the price of a 50 inch LCD projector, is wider and weighs
more.
>
> And it is significantly thinner.
>
> > And it has the burn problem as well.
>
> Only for the careless, irresponsible or infantile.
>

Or the uninformed. The fact of the matter is that of all technologies
available for HDTV, plasma is the most susceptible to burn in. Burn in
is a real threat to any technology that burns phosphor to produce an
image. From what I've seen Plasam is by far the worst.

The only real way to avoid it is to limit you use of viewing of static
content (static being anything from black/grey side bars to video game
status meters) to no more than 20-25% of your total viewing time.
(20-25% is based on technology improvements over the last few years, it
was recommended less than 15% not very long ago). You can base the 20%
on total monthly viewing hours.

Anyone who tells you otherwise is lieing, ask them what they base their
stance on? I base mine on experience and what the manufactuers suggest
(I encourage anyone who doubts me to give their manufacters service
center a ring...)

Burn in is not covered under any manufacters warrenty that I have seen.
The cost to repair burn-in is astronomic, it's usually near the cost of
a new set (at times it exceeds the cost of a new set).

-Jeremy

 

[JAS]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Convergence, convergence, convergence ..... we don't need no steenking
convergence!

"Dave Gower" <davegow.removethis@magma.ca> wrote in message
news😱aKdnUo7UO40YivcRVn-iw@magma.ca...
> For example, looking at the Sony website, a 50 inch plasma is way more
than
> twice the price of a 50 inch LCD projector, is wider and weighs more. And
it
> has the burn problem as well. Since the picture quality of the LCD is
> spectacular on HD, I can't imagine the plasma could be noticeably better.
> The newest LCD is plenty bright enough for a normal room. The only
> advantage of the plasma I can see is that it is thinner, but the LCD is
only
> a little over a foot thick anyway. Is there something else I'm missing?
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On 8 Dec 2004 13:23:50 -0800, jeremy@pdq.net wrote:

>
>Kalman Rubinson wrote:
>> Only for the careless, irresponsible or infantile.

>Or the uninformed. The fact of the matter is that of all technologies
>available for HDTV, plasma is the most susceptible to burn in. Burn in
>is a real threat to any technology that burns phosphor to produce an
>image. From what I've seen Plasam is by far the worst.

Agreed. However, there's no reason to expect significant burn-in as
long as you know what you are doing. It is not the correct technology
for some. In fact, I have just recommended a front projection system
for a friend who was wowed by my system since his needs and uses are
not the same as mine.

My viewing consists of equal parts full screen HD broadcasts, SD
broadcasts zoomed and DVDs that fill the screen. Rarely, if ever, are
there any exceptions. No computer connections and no games. Works
fine for me.

Kal

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Richard C." <post-age@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:41b76d40$0$1686$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
> X-No-archive: yes
>
> "Dave Gower" <davegow.removethis@magma.ca> wrote in message
> news😱aKdnUo7UO40YivcRVn-iw@magma.ca...
> > For example, looking at the Sony website, a 50 inch plasma is way more
> > than
> > twice the price of a 50 inch LCD projector, is wider and weighs more.
And
> > it
> > has the burn problem as well. Since the picture quality of the LCD is
> > spectacular on HD
> ==============================
> Actually, it is lousy!
> Have you watched any HD on one?
> The pixelization and blurring of motion makes me sea sick.
>
> CRT RPTV still beats them all (except FP CRT)
> ===============================

While I agree that CRT based systems are still the best choice, to be fair,
PDPs don't suffer from pixelation and motion blurring that is worse than
CRTs. At least not on the higher end PDPs. What you are seeing is likely
either in the source or the low level activation noise that IS common to
PDPs. The do, however, seem to vary greatly in performance. The best are
very good.

Leonard

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Richard C." <post-age@spamcop.net> wrote

> Have you watched any HD on one?
> The pixelization and blurring of motion makes me sea sick.

Yes, a Sony 50 inch at the local Best Buy a couple of weeks ago. I saw none
of that, but I'll check some more. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

X-No-archive: yes

"Leonard Caillouet" <nospam@noway.com> wrote in message
news:ViLtd.125794$jE2.91866@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Richard C." <post-age@spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:41b76d40$0$1686$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
>> X-No-archive: yes
>>
>> "Dave Gower" <davegow.removethis@magma.ca> wrote in message
>> news😱aKdnUo7UO40YivcRVn-iw@magma.ca...
>> > For example, looking at the Sony website, a 50 inch plasma is way more
>> > than
>> > twice the price of a 50 inch LCD projector, is wider and weighs more.
> And
>> > it
>> > has the burn problem as well. Since the picture quality of the LCD is
>> > spectacular on HD
>> ==============================
>> Actually, it is lousy!
>> Have you watched any HD on one?
>> The pixelization and blurring of motion makes me sea sick.
>>
>> CRT RPTV still beats them all (except FP CRT)
>> ===============================
>
> While I agree that CRT based systems are still the best choice, to be
> fair,
> PDPs don't suffer from pixelation and motion blurring that is worse than
> CRTs. At least not on the higher end PDPs. What you are seeing is likely
> either in the source or the low level activation noise that IS common to
> PDPs. The do, however, seem to vary greatly in performance. The best are
> very good.
>
> Leonard
>
===============================
I was referring to LCD.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

X-No-archive: yes

"Dave Gower" <davegow.removethis@magma.ca> wrote in message
news:GsudnW4P7OwMACrcRVn-vA@magma.ca...
>
> "Richard C." <post-age@spamcop.net> wrote
>
>> Have you watched any HD on one?
>> The pixelization and blurring of motion makes me sea sick.
>
> Yes, a Sony 50 inch at the local Best Buy a couple of weeks ago. I saw
> none of that, but I'll check some more. Thanks for the heads up.
========================
Once again, I am referring to LCD.

But, I drive my wife crazy because I see imperfections even on our Pioneer
Elite at times that she is blind to. Usually , they are source problems.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Richard C." <post-age@spamcop.net> wrote

> Once again, I am referring to LCD.

So am I. I went on a tour of several stores this morning. Quite honestly, I
don't like plasmas all that much. To me they seem almost unrealistically
crisp and colourful. I found the Sony LCD projection more comfortable to
watch, but the Sammy DLPs looked more realistic and are my favourite of
those three. And finally, I looked at something I missed the first time -
the JVC HD-ILA. It was just as good as the DLPs, and is smaller and lighter
for each screen size. Kind of pricey though, but being a new technology may
have more downward room.

Choices, choices, choices.

Note on my reaction to plasma. I had cataract surgery a couple of years ago.
I could not believe how vivid everything looks now - your natural lenses are
never completely clear, whereas the artificial ones are. This may affect how
I see various TV screens.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 13:14:35 -0500, "Dave Gower"
<davegow.removethis@magma.ca> wrote:

>
>"Richard C." <post-age@spamcop.net> wrote
>
>> Once again, I am referring to LCD.
>
>So am I. I went on a tour of several stores this morning. Quite honestly, I
>don't like plasmas all that much. To me they seem almost unrealistically
>crisp and colourful.

They come set that way to stand out at the store. Mine came,
predictably, set up in 'torch' mode with brightness, contrast and
sharpness turned up way too far.

If they are properly calibrated, they are quite realistic and, along
with the best FP, better than other technologies, $$$ aside.

Kal

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Alan Figgatt wrote:

> The "blurry" problem with LCD TVs is caused by the response time of

> the LCDs.

A lot of older or cheaper LCD TVs I've seen are blurry even on still
pictures.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Dave Gower wrote:

> "Richard C." <post-age@spamcop.net> wrote
>
> So am I. I went on a tour of several stores this morning. Quite honestly, I
> don't like plasmas all that much. To me they seem almost unrealistically
> crisp and colourful. I found the Sony LCD projection more comfortable to
> watch, but the Sammy DLPs looked more realistic and are my favourite of
> those three. And finally, I looked at something I missed the first time -
> the JVC HD-ILA. It was just as good as the DLPs, and is smaller and lighter
> for each screen size. Kind of pricey though, but being a new technology may
> have more downward room.
>
> Choices, choices, choices.
>
> Note on my reaction to plasma. I had cataract surgery a couple of years ago.
> I could not believe how vivid everything looks now - your natural lenses are
> never completely clear, whereas the artificial ones are. This may affect how
> I see various TV screens.

If you went to the big B&M chains - Best Buy, Circuit City, etc - be
careful in judging screen quality there. Most of them display the sets
under bright lights and crank the screen brightness and colors up, when
they anything at all to sets. The video feed can vary widely between
sets as they split the signals many times to all the sets. The video
feed could also be DVD, upconverted DVD, OTA SD, or real HD. A trip to a
specialty dealer or high end store might give you a better read on
picture quality.

The DLPs can present a good picture but some people find them bothered
by the color flash effect after they have had the set for a while. The
current DLP RP sets on the market all have a single DLP chip and use a
color wheel which flashes between RGB to generate the color. The LCD RP
and JVC ILA sets have 3 chips, one for each color, projecting the image,
so color flash is not an issue with those sets.

Alan Figgatt