Looking at television from the eye of a photographer

[ir0n_ma1den]

look at it this way:

CRT = film

LCD = digital

see the difference now?

 

[jcolman]

I've been in the television industry for nearly 30 years and into photography for 40. I didn't think too long and hard about anything except picture quality and reliability when I bought my plasma.

 

[jols]

Plasma screens suffer from a couple of problems that LCDs don't. One of the major problems being burn-in - when static images on screen get permanently "burnt in" to the screen - say like a tv station logo, or worse quote]


This is an absolute myth and never actually happens.

buying a new tv depends on bdget and importance to yous.

my plasma cost 1000 pounds and its great but some would stand back i horror i spent that much.
we are all different.

 

[Mav]

Plasma screens suffer from a couple of problems that LCDs don't. One of the major problems being burn-in - when static images on screen get permanently "burnt in" to the screen - say like a tv station logo, or worse

This is an absolute myth and never actually happens.

I've seen it happen on display models in stores. TV stations here (in the U.S.) like to park their logos permanently at usually the bottom right corner of your screen, which can cause the burn-in. Not sure if stations do the same thing in other countries, though.

 

[Seefutlung]

I just got a LG LCD ... and I am very pleased (and I'm not into TV... don't watch it most nights). It has slots for CF and SD cards. It will run photos and music from these slots. Stuff looks very very good. Not cheap but better than my folks Vizio. Now when company wants to see my snaps I just slap a card into the set and we can all watch.

Gary

 

[jols]

I've seen it happen on display models in stores. TV stations here (in the U.S.) like to park their logos permanently at usually the bottom right corner of your screen, which can cause the burn-in. Not sure if stations do the same thing in other countries, though.

Not happened here in the u.k, maybe the prob was sorted before they went on sale here.

I know plasmas were available in the u.s about 6 month before here and our channels do not display their logo on the screen

 

[jols]

I've seen it happen on display models in stores. TV stations here (in the U.S.) like to park their logos permanently at usually the bottom right corner of your screen, which can cause the burn-in. Not sure if stations do the same thing in other countries, though.

Not happened here in the u.k, maybe the prob was sorted before they went on sale here.

I know plasmas were available in the u.s about 6 month before here and our channels do not display their logo on the screen while we are watching it. [how annoying would that be]

 

[Heck]

This http://www.avforums.com/forums/index.php? might be a good place to go to learn about televisions. I know when I bought mine I went there for a while but one word of warning the people there seem to have endless streams of money to spend on televisions and electronics.

Yeah thats got to be the best site for any info you would ever need on a tv. But if you read too much you will spend more on other things like sound system and such. But what makes any lcd or plasma look great is something easy. light control. If you can control the light in the room you get the best looking tv.

 

[gendarmee]

Not happened here in the u.k, maybe the prob was sorted before they went on sale here.

I know plasmas were available in the u.s about 6 month before here and our channels do not display their logo on the screen while we are watching it. [how annoying would that be]

The burnin does happen in the long run.
Its forgiving for static images displayed once in a while or displayed for some moments.

 

[jols]

How long do you think it will take to happen then?

 

[JerryPH]

It will not with common sense use in the recent technology plasma screens (not talking about last year's models, but from this year on). Some of the best screens on the market today are the Pioneer Plasma screens. They offer incredible colour quality increase over their nearest competitor and suffer no latency on fast moving objects and though burn-in is a remote possibility, they are so close to LCD now in term of lifespans (30-40 year lifespans for either one now), as to make no real world difference.

As it stands now, if you want a better pic, plasma is the way to go. If you want to avoid burn in becuase you are forgetful or paranoid, puchase an LCD screen... though as this article discusses, to get burn in, you would need to place a DVD on pause for over 10 hours (again, thats with last year's and older models, not the newer ones)... and that is just negligence.

http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/plasmatvreviews/plasma-vs-lcd.html

 

[jols]

ah. not really a problem then. who keeps a tv for that long I change mine every three or four years.
thanks for the info though

 

[gendarmee]

thats a good piece of information.
Didnt know about the newer breed of plasmas.
Plasma is the way to go then.

 

[Wilynn]

I haven't yet decided whether I'm going to buy a plasma or an LCD. I've spent a lot of hours reading user reviews and reports written by technicians. Some of the things I read contradict some of the things I read in this thread. I am not an expert. As someone who's using an old CRT television, I am not biased towards either plasma or LCD's. Now, here's what I've read thus far:

Burn in on plasmas: A person needs to "break in" their plasma set in order to avoid burn in. That's a must, or at least it will be for me if I go with a plasma TV. This break in period lasts 100-200 hours. Some plasma owners have reported that they did not break in their TV yet they have not experienced any burn in issues. Panasonic has instructions on how to break in their plasma TV's. Yes, some people do experience burn in or ghosting, while others don't. A manufacturers warranty will usually not cover burn in issues. I tend to think that burn in isn't as big an issue as it once used to be say like it was back in 2005 or so, as the manufacturers have made improvements in that department. That's just the feeling I get from all the user reviews I've read.

Lag time on LCD's: This is a negative trait when watching a fast moving event or object say for instance a sporting event. Some LCD owners experience lag time, while others don't. While a potential plasma owner has to be concerned with burn in, the LCD owner has to be concerned with lag time.

Picture quality: If you're going to use your television for TV purposes and not for a computer monitor, the plasma has a better quality picture, especially for sports or fast moving sequential activity. If movies are your thing, a plasma TV would be your best choice. Plasmas appear to be more realistic than LCDs are. I am not basing that on experience. I'm basing that on user reviews and technical reports. As Crutchfield stated, "...picture slightly less natural than top plasmas" when they were compared the LCD to the plasma. If you're going to use your television as a computer monitor, you might opt for an LCD.

Longevity: From what I read, plasmas used to fail quite often...back in the early 2000's. That no longer appears to be the case. It appears as if plasmas are as durable as LCDs.

Plasmas becoming obsolete: That's not going to happen. At least not for awhile. True, Sony quit making plasma tv's. But there are many other manufacturers who still sell plasmas. Actually, it looks as if both plasmas and LCD's will both become obsolete at the same time, or when SED televisions hit the market. Ironically, SED's use phosphor just like plasma sets do.

The glare issue with plasmas: Panasonic offers an anti-glare screen that many users report as being very beneficial. In other words, if you buy a Panasonic plasma TV, glare isn't much of an issue. That was kind of a surprise to me as glare is a big issue with plasmas in general.

LCD's and burned out pixels: It happens. Sometimes a pixel or two will crash. A manufacturers warranty usually will not cover a bad pixel.

The best place to buy my new TV: Looks like Costco is the best place, for me, anyway. They have a no questions asked 90 day return policy. And when the manufacturers one year warranty runs out, Costco extends it for an extra year, turning your one year warranty into a two year warranty. Gotta love that! I pay 50 bucks a year for my Costco membership, and this is one of the perks they offer to their members. True, their price might be a little higher, but no one can touch their no questions asked 90 day return policy. I think of it as consumer insurance.

SED televisions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-conduction_electron-emitter_display

LCD vs. Plasma:
1) http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/S-EFIMZMaScqR/learningcenter/home/tv_flatpanel.html
2) http://www.cnet.com.au/tvs/0,239035250,339273215,00.htm

The following links contain the four best TVs (aka Best Buy) as picked by the always trusted Consumer Reports Magazine. CR is a magazine that's been around for decades. They test a plethora of products; cars, ice cream, washing machines, ect. They publish an issue once a month, and they do not allow any advertising in their magazine or on their web site, EVER. They never have, and they never will. No mater how much money you throw at them, CR will not allow you to adverstise your product in their magazine or on their website. That's what makes Consumer Reports one of America's best institutions, and one reason why you can trust their reviews. In the March 2008 issue they tested too many LCDs and plasmas to count. And now their top 4 picks from the March 2008 issue and note that CR does not rank these 4 in numerical order (as I am doing here) but rather side-by-side (meaning that TV #4 is as good if not better than TV #1):

1) http://www.amazon.com/review/product/B000P6R6DI/ref=cm_cr_pr_recent?%5Fencoding=UTF8&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

2)
http://www.amazon.com/review/produc...coding=UTF8&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

3)
http://www.amazon.com/review/produc...coding=UTF8&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

4)
http://www.amazon.com/review/produc...coding=UTF8&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

 

[JerryPH]

1) http://www.amazon.com/review/product/B000P6R6DI/ref=cm_cr_pr_recent?%5Fencoding=UTF8&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

2)
http://www.amazon.com/review/produc...coding=UTF8&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

3)
http://www.amazon.com/review/produc...coding=UTF8&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

4)
http://www.amazon.com/review/produc...coding=UTF8&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

Interesting that none of the TVs you show are 1080i... they are all the older 720p format that has much lower resolution to what is out there.

Maybe this was what you are shopping for, but about any 1080i is better than a 720p. These numbers represent the approximate lines of resolution the set uses.