[Vapepreab]

And I disagree with the first post considering SD: Plasmas tend to display SD signals better, because their pixels aren't square but a bit "moving" because of the explosions. This will result on a softer image on the plasma and more pixelated image on the LCD. Still it's what you want but I prefer softness over blockiness.

And yes of course there's the matter of 24p, if you're sure you're going to be bothered by it and going to have a Bluray player, then watch out cuz the Panasonics don't have the feature (or at least not the ones in your price range,you didn't list it on the things you wanted so I left it out of the picture). I'm not bothered by it myself though.

As for desktop usage: I've been using my 50 inch 1080p panasonic plasma as main monitor for months now couldn't be happier. All of the panasonics support 1:1 pixel mapping (simply disable overscanning and set the zoom to 16:9), in fact I think all 1080p televisions nowadays do.

Still, when I want to watch a DVD with maximum quality, I go to my friend's place and watch it on my old sd panasonic 42pa50 plasma tv. No upscaler can match that

[provigil]

If you have a room with no windows that you can turn the lights down in, and don't mind green phosphor lag, and you don't mind spending 40% more on electricity to run the set, and your willing to take the time and effort to display colored sidebars when watching 4:3 content so that you don't get uneven screen burn in, and your not going to use it as a PC monitor ever, and anti burn in tech called "pixel shift" which basically moves the picture around slightly to try to prevent burn in don't bother you. And you want to do things like "not watching 4:3 tv for the first 200 hours or pause a DVD player for more than 15 minutes (both from a recent guide on how to maximize your enjoyment of your new plasma), and your not concerned about altitude sickness as a random issue. Then by all means buy a plasma.

Anyways my local Best Buy has a Samsung LN52A750 mixed in with the Plasma's and honestly it's hard to tell the difference under the very dark lighting conditions in the TV den of Doom. It's between an LG and a Kuro, and if I had not been wearing my polarized sunglasses at the time I likely would not have spotted it. Side by side it has a slightly different color cast, with flesh tones looking slightly cooler than on the plasmas, when they are showing a bright image like the ice for the Stanley Cup playoffs, it looks gray on both of the plasmas (the Kuro looks a lot better than the LG in this regard) the black levels are similar between all 3 sets, though looking carefully the Kuro seems to have slightly deeper blacks.

Anyways my final judgement was that the Samsung LCD suffered no major disparity's in PQ compared to the Plasmas it was next to (the Kuro edged it in my eyes for PQ but not by a huge margin) and it has considerably fewer drawbacks to ownership, The part where the LCD was $500 cheaper didn't hurt my feelings either.

So anyways I am going to be making my purchase in less than 3 weeks (still saving) and unless the new Sony Z series really blows my mind it's going to be an A750.

Oh and for the record the PS3 does an immaculate job upscaling, regular DVD's run though the PS3 look magnificent on my current 37" HD TV.

[Elelaytet]

well the dealer has let me try and lcd at home and also a plasma i find the image on both pretty good but i see the lcd has a little bit of lag i wonder about the 120hz if they are really closer to the plasmas is it worth it the leap to the 120hz?

i am a big fan of movies and will connect my computer alot to the monitor so all im scared for plasma are burn in

[bonyclayd]

If you have a room with no windows that you can turn the lights down in, and don't mind green phosphor lag, and you don't mind spending 40% more on electricity to run the set, and your willing to take the time and effort to display colored sidebars when watching 4:3 content so that you don't get uneven screen burn in, and your not going to use it as a PC monitor ever, and anti burn in tech called "pixel shift" which basically moves the picture around slightly to try to prevent burn in don't bother you. And you want to do things like "not watching 4:3 tv for the first 200 hours or pause a DVD player for more than 15 minutes (both from a recent guide on how to maximize your enjoyment of your new plasma), and your not concerned about altitude sickness as a random issue. Then by all means buy a plasma.

While most of what you said has a sliver of truth to it. It is ALL blown way out of proportion.

1. You can watch it in a room with windows. If you could watch your old tube TV with windows you can watch a plasma. I have a 9th gen panasonic and its fine in daylight. The 11th gens are even brighter.

2. Plasma dosnt use that much more electricity than LCD. The quoted wattages are PEAK power as in a full white screen. Actual usage is much less. This is also very brand dependent as panasonics are normally high power hogs. Though this years models are more efficient. I mean honestly if your buying a $2000 dollar TV should you really be concerned about a $2.00 increase in your power bill?

3. You will not notice the pixel shift unless its a completely still screen. Even then its not that big of a deal and can be turned off.

4. The usual break in time is 100 hrs. Though its not totally necessary. You can watch movies with black bars during break in if you want. Just keep your programming varied.

5. You can pause your DVD player for ALOT longer than 15 minutes. Once the TV is broken in you can have still images on the screen for hours and will only have minor IR which will go away in a few seconds of displaying something else. Burn-in is a thing of the past for most purposes. But if abused it is still possible.

6. Phosphor lag. Like rainbows and DLP. Some people are susceptible to this and others are not. Just like some people find the blurring on LCD's really annoying while other don't really notice it.

7. Attitude sickness? If your referring about buzzing. Then yes from what ive read buzzing seems to increase in higher altitudes. But this is very much brand dependent.

When exactly was that article you read written? Must be VERY old.

[provigil]

My point was that Plasma has a pretty lengthy list of issues that no one ever mentions when saying "get a plasma, you don't want an LCD, plasma is so much better"

Altitude sickness happens because the gases in the set are under pressure when you take to a higher altitude the delta between inside and outside pressure is greater, causing issues where the set has a hard time cooling it's self,thus resulting in either a hum from the convection cooled systems, or excessive fan noise from the fan cooled systems, running at a higher than intended temperature can significantly reduce the lifespan of the set. newer sets are have higher altitude ratings, new Pioneers are rated to 7500 feet now, but I could see it being an issue with a cheaper off brand set.

I have heard figures as low as 120~180 watts average power consumption for a calibrated 52" LCD, that is a lot less than the average power consumption of a 50" LCD, if a calibrated Plasma dropped 100 watts to 270 it could still be 2x the power use of the LCD or as much as $50 a year more in power, ok thats worst case and it only comes out to be $4.15 a month more for power for the Plasma but I try to have the lowest power bill possible.

If I were to pick a real issue though it's very poor performance under moderate to bright light. You can say it's no worse than an old CRT set but I remember the Trinitron I used to own holding up reasonably well when exposed to daylight.

As far as LCD's major issues, black levels are vastly improved on the newest sets, see the A750 for example, and the "lag" issues are largely corrected between 120 Hz, motion processing, and some sets flashing black for part of a frame to clear the image retention, LCD can turn in an impressive result.

[ArrichMer]

As far as LCD's major issues, black levels are vastly improved on the newest sets, see the A750 for example, and the "lag" issues are largely corrected between 120 Hz, motion processing, and some sets flashing black for part of a frame to clear the image retention, LCD can turn in an impressive result.

Your plasma hate is ridiculous and your "lag" information is flat out wrong. "lag" in the form of ghosting or input is not affected at all by the move to 120hz, black frame insert or by interpolation.
Here's a read up on black frame and how it doesn't reduce lag.

[Vapepreab]

Oh and considering the power consumption: My local computer news website just finished doing a roundup of alot tellies (both plasma and lcd).

The funny part? Cocerning power consumption in all 3 catagories (budget, midrange, high end) the plasmas scored average, and it was always an LCD with the highest power consumption (Sony). This was the average power consumption measured during the display of a few blurays. So that myth can be kicked out of the window. And burn in gets tested by hdtvtest.co.uk, they say that even after 200 hours of a static image, there are no permanent signs of burn in with the latest panasonics!

Oh and (as I expected) of course the Plasmas won in the midrange and high end catagory, a Panasonic 42pz85 and Pioneer Kuro respectively. The budget class was for tvs under 800 euros, where you'd have to look really hard to find a plasma obviously.

And why would you bother about the 120Hz thingy when the refresh time of an LCD can barely keep up with it? That's marketing BS for ya.

[Thorwaywhobia]

there are plenty of good plasmas around, but personally, I would buy an LCD or LCOS.