Help me pick my tv!
Project Mayhem
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
So it's between these two.
42" Insignia plasma, 720p, 600HZ
and
42" Insignia LCD, 1080p, 60HZ
I'm leaning toward the plasma, mainly because of the better reviews, but is there anyone who could lend their knowledge toward my situation? I'll be sitting about 10-12 feet from the tv, and getting a PS3 with it. The plasma was up until today $50 cheaper, but now they're the same price.
I'm assuming I can find a 10% off coupon right?
Anyway, which would you go with?
EDIT: Or do I got with the 120HZ 1080p LCD for $100 more?
42" Insignia plasma, 720p, 600HZ
and
42" Insignia LCD, 1080p, 60HZ
I'm leaning toward the plasma, mainly because of the better reviews, but is there anyone who could lend their knowledge toward my situation? I'll be sitting about 10-12 feet from the tv, and getting a PS3 with it. The plasma was up until today $50 cheaper, but now they're the same price.
I'm assuming I can find a 10% off coupon right?
Anyway, which would you go with?
EDIT: Or do I got with the 120HZ 1080p LCD for $100 more?
Project Mayhem on
0
Posts
You probably already know this, but if you're worried about the impact on your electric bill, dropping $600-$700 on a big-screen TV is probably a dumb idea.
Also, plasmas have gotten far more efficient, and as soon as you take the set out of store-display torch mode the power consumption pretty much halves. Oh, and the set tends to look much better too.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
If you're looking at going the $700 route, and you want to stick with BestBuy (instead of online ordering), this is a much better buy than anything you listed. It may be 720p compared to the 1080p on that other one, but at 42" there is very little difference up close. There is NO difference at 10-12 feet. And I would trust the picture on that Panasonic far over the Insignia.
If you must stick with the listed options, the $700 you listed is your best bet. Barring that the plasma has a better chance of handling motion over that 60Hz LCD.
Edit: for extra lolz, go to the link I put, click on specifications, and notice how this display is both a "Plasma Flat-Panel" and a "Flat-panel LCD". I hate retailers. It's a plasma, to be clear.
PSN: TheScrublet
Wait, you think just because someone is buying a relatively expensive TV they need not worry about on-going electrical costs?
I only mention it because the spike in energy consumption is not insignificant and oftentimes plays a role in people's buying decisions. Plasmas have an overall better picture quality in terms of colors however many people still opt to go the LCD route as, all around, they consider it to be a more beneficial expenditure.
No, I think that if someone is that concerned that a $10/month difference in their electric bill will bankrupt them, they probably shouldn't be spending $700 on a TV.
A good 42" plasma, like the Panasonic that Scrublet linked, will be under 200W average consumption. A good 42" LCD is about 140W - you can buy Super Eco Deluxe models for $Texas that get in the 100W range, but there goes a lot of the energy savings right there. 200W to 140W is a lightbulb in difference.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
The difference can be much more than $10 a month. Besides that anybody that operates on monthly budget but has a slush fund to make purchases like a TV might want to be aware of added, on-going costs. How is that difficult to understand and why is it "stupid"?
Fine, let's play the numbers game.
- Let's assume that a plasma of equal size takes up 100W more to run than an equally sized LCD.
- Let's also assume that the cost of power where the OP lives is high, say $0.20/kWh.
- Finally, let's assume that the OP is a TV addict, never sleeps, and will have the thing running constantly.
24H x 100W = 2.4kWh a day, x $0.20/kWh = $0.48/day, x 30 days/month = $14.40/month extra to run the plasma.
And that's if he runs the goddamn thing twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Even if he uses the thing eight hours a day, it's still only five bucks a month.
So can we drop the "olol power usage" thing now?
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
To the OP, I would also recommend against an Insignia.
I'm fine with the electric bill.
No need for all the math.
Didn't think about the windows, I may have to go with an LCD.
It's no top of the line samsung, my only complaint at all is the imperfect black level, but it's still damn nice looking for a 42" television.
Yea, short answer is
Plasma will give you a better picture, but is heavier, produces a lot of heat, needs very good lighting control, and uses more energy.
If you aren't fine with any of those, then you should go LCD.
I would really advise you go with a different brand. Check out the OP in the TV thread sticked in the tech forum, lots of good stuff (including what resolution you should consider at what distance you sit).
I'm sure if you had your set and a similar Samsung next to each other, both calibrated (this is key), the Samsung would be noticeably better.
Please everyone, calibrate your TV.
Limed for blinding-in-store-defaults effect. :P
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
Burn in hasn't been a problem for plasmas for quite some time.
What you're talking about is image retention, which is temporary and barely noticeable unless you're staring at a totally black image. There are lots of differences between a plasma and an LCD that might make one or the other better for a particular purpose, but burn-in is not something that anyone should be factoring in as it's a total non-issue that hasn't been a problem since the early days of plasmas.
Please don't post if you don't know what you're talking about. First, I have no idea what Sony plasma you're talking about because they don't even make them anymore. There is more than enough documentation I can point to on both AVSForums and multiple respected hardware sites to show that Panasonics do not have a burn-in problem. Samsungs DO have quicker image retention issues, and possibly burn-in potential...but it's definitely not a half hour. Lastly, as an anecdotal example I obviously can't prove, I have left static images on my Pioneer plasma (their last model) as long as 5 hours with no burn-in.
There are reasons not to go plasma. Burn-in is no longer one of them. And you shouldn't buy Samsung plasmas anyways, that is primarily an LCD company at this point.
Edit: to jump off the above guy's post, except when I talked about Samsungs, everything I said about burn-in goes for IR as well. Except for Samsungs
PSN: TheScrublet
Personally speaking, at this price range I would recommend spending extra money on a better TV and doing the calibration yourself using publicly available tools. The differences between DIY and pro for these TVs isn't that great, and the feature differences can be.
PSN: TheScrublet
I had a 42" 720p Panasonic plasma, and I chalk this experience up to it having been the floor model, but it had a huge orange tinted "watermark" as I call it down the left side of the display, and I still had awful awful image retention. I returned this set.
I bought my 42" 1080p Insignia television with the money I got from returning my Panasonic, and right out of the box it was crisper looking, there was no image retention, and after proper calibration I could not be happier with the quality of the image. It plays movies great, watches tv excellent, plays blu-rays fantastic, and I'm not afraid to leave it turned on, fall asleep while I'm watching it, or use it as a computer monitor from time to time.
What I'm trying to say here is that even in a time when "burn is isn't a problem" I still had guitar hero buttons showing up in every black scene of every show or movie I watched for well over a week after a 2-3 hour gaming session. Not cool.
edit:
as an aside, 2 of my room mates have had 32" westinhouse of the water, especially one of those new samsung LED backlit LCDs, but itelevisions, and I can definitely agree that they look like absolute shit, mostly in terms of shitty black levels and lots of artifacting in the image even from very clean signals,and yes, anything with better-than-cathode backlighting is going to blow my tv outn this price range, if it were me, I would choose the LCD every time.
For TV watching, however, I think for 10-feet away 50" is a perfect size. So I guess you could always move back if it's too wide for being that close while gaming.
Well, if I bought the 50" I'd sit on the couch. That's why I'm considering saving the $500 and just grabbing the 42" and a comfy, low, floor based chair. But 50"s...so tempting...
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
3DS FC: 5343-7720-0490
projector.
just kidding. if you're in a super bright room that's not going to be optimal for any television, but a bright LCD with a matte screen would probably have the most visible display / least glare.
LCD if you can't invest in curtains.
Second the LCD recommendation. I have a plasma and I have light-filtering (not blocking) shades. On sunny days the glare can be a little annoying. And my plasma has a super-special anti-glare coating (as well as simonizing and scotchguard) so a mere mortal plasma would be pretty horrible.
Also, I've heard from a few sources that some plasmas come with warranties that cover burn in, which means no worries there.
I believe Panasonic actually has a technology that pretty much eliminates burn in as a problem on their TVs.
The only downside of plasma is the half life of the gasses inside, which means the picture will get duller over time. OTOH, I've seen reviews that claim plasmas have about the same lifespan as an LCD.
Most plasmas have a gloss screen which makes them bad for bright spaces.
You're right on the picture advantage, and the burn-in technology. I honestly don't feel like getting into an argument with the dude who thinks plasmas have burn-in issues. You can beat the shit out of the current-gen Pannys (and the last year), especially if you treat them nice the first 100 hours. The half-life is true, but bear in mind that it takes about 8 years for the brightness to decrease by half, and that's using the TV a shit-ton. Don't put a plasma in a bright room. I think Panasonic is the one that is advertising an anti-glare feature right now. Fuck them, don't do it. Though to be fair, some of the Samsung LCDs I see at the store are starting to get that macbook-look to their screens too...
Since plasmas are so cheap (compared to LCDs), there isn't much of a market for lower-size models. Add to that the fact that some of the plasma advantages are much less noticeable at the smaller sizes and you should have your answer. Lucky for plasma tech that making a good 70" LCD is still insanely expensive.
PSN: TheScrublet
Looks like one of the Best Buys outside of Portland just got some Panasonic G10s (why no G15s?) and the Samsung PN50B650's in. Going to go eyeball those two and grab one I think on Saturday. The Panasonic has better blacks but the Samsung is supposed to have better colors and handles 24p better. Decisions!
PSN: TheScrublet
Honestly, I think I've lived without 24p for now, I can live without for a while longer. When I upgrade again in about two years I'll make sure whatever I get is capable. I'm sure the G10 will look great no matter what.