Are plasmas on the way out?

[nonameo]

The more I think about it, the less I see a point in getting a plasma. Plasmas are limited by pixel density, and they're heavy. From what I understand, they're also more expensive to manufacture. Not to mention the whole crazy flicker thing with(some, I guess) plasmas.

The thing is, LCDs seem to be making great strides in the areas that plasmas are supposed to be so great at like:

viewing angle
contrast/color
sheer size

so, are plasmas seeing the last of their days?


Locked due to the attack fest and total topic derailment going on. Let's keep this subforum clean guys

-AV&HT Moderator YOyoYOhowsDAjello

 

[Schadenfroh]

Possibly in Britain

 

[DBL]

Unfortunately, this may be the case but only b/c of effective LCD marketing.

Pixel density is not an issue considering they can get 1080p into a 42" display, which is way more than enough.

Weight is a non-issue unless lifting your TV is part of your daily workout.

Power consumption is completely overblown. Both technologies use about the same amount of electricity. The difference (it really depends on the make of the TV) averages out to less than 10% or perhaps $10 - $20 per year.

While LCD have improved overall, when you place a good properly configured current gen plasma IN YOUR HOME, it will still produce a noticeably richer and more contrasty picture than any LCD out there. Sure LCD's produce a nice picture but very few people have the means to compare the pictures in their own home under normal lighting conditions.

So, I doubt Plasma will be totally eliminated for this reason until a technology which is superior comes about or LCD's shortcoming are totally resolved. Until then, there will always be a market for Plasma created by those who put picture quality first.

 

[spidey07]

Most of the new announcements are for plasma sets. If anything, DLP is on the way out.

 

[Czar]

I'm looking at the 1080p 50" panasonic plasma right now

lcd's just in no way can match the blacks of plasmas

 

[Raincity]

Matsushita Electric, Panasonics parent company has expanded it's Mexico and Malay plants and started building another one in Japan to keep up with the strong demand for their plasma pannels.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: Raincity
Matsushita Electric, Panasonics parent company has expanded it's Mexico and Malay plants and started building another one in Japan to keep up with the strong demand for their plasma pannels.

Any idea if the future Japanese built Plasmas will make it to the US or is it more of a regional supply rather than a specific display type manufacturing setup?

 

[dwell]

Plasma unfortunately is a waining technology. It looks better than any other flat panel under the right conditions, but unfortunately not all TV viewing consists of watching movies in a pitch-black room.

LCD has made some huge strides this year. I don't think the technology is quite as good as plasma for hardcore HT, but it's good enough for the majority of viewers. Black levels now rival that of plasma. The motion issues are fixed with 120hz technology. Plasma has Pioneer Kuro this year and 10 lumen next year, but it's being eclipsed by LCDs strides.

I really wish SED was a reality. It seemed so much better than both LCD and Plasma. Never going to happen though

 

[MX2]

I hope so....I am sooooo sick of hearing people say 'plasma' just to hear themselvels say it


P-L-A-S-M-A.....PLASMA.....I HAVE A PLASMA TV .....ugh

 

[Kadarin]

I have a plasma tv...

Got it for free, too..

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: Chris
Plasma unfortunately is a waining technology. It looks better than any other flat panel under the right conditions, but unfortunately not all TV viewing consists of watching movies in a pitch-black room.

LCD has made some huge strides this year. I don't think the technology is quite as good as plasma for hardcore HT, but it's good enough for the majority of viewers. Black levels now rival that of plasma. The motion issues are fixed with 120hz technology. Plasma has Pioneer Kuro this year and 10 lumen next year, but it's being eclipsed by LCDs strides.

I really wish SED was a reality. It seemed so much better than both LCD and Plasma. Never going to happen though

You do not need a "pitch black" room to see the advantages of a plasma television.

 

[Oyeve]

Wasnt some new tech announced last year called Laser or something? IIR its supposed to be twice as better than plasma, last 5 times longer than plasma (plasma deteriorates) and cost a lot less?

 

[LegendKiller]

LCD still has a long way to go before it reaches Plasma. Sure, it can hit 1080p, but the level of detail, black levels, overall brightness, even-ness of color, quality of the backlight...etc.

You can go on and on. I think people really haven't seen an LCD compared to the newest gen of Panasonic or Pioneer plasmas.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
LCD still has a long way to go before it reaches Plasma. Sure, it can hit 1080p, but the level of detail, black levels, overall brightness, even-ness of color, quality of the backlight...etc.

You can go on and on. I think people really haven't seen an LCD compared to the newest gen of Panasonic or Pioneer plasmas.

I don't think you've seen the a plasma compared to the newest gen of Samsung or Sony LCDs.

I am not saying they are overall better than the 8G Pios (last year's Pannys maybe) but LCD has definitely gotten its act together this year and the plasma makers should be concerned about their future and dwindling market share.

Black levels are there with LCD, as is evident with the Samsung 71 series. Sammy 81 series really has black levels nailed beyond what even 8G Pios can dream of, but IMO LED backlighting needs to get some of the kinks ironed out before I can really endorse it.

Brightness goes to LCD hands down, especially in any kind of normal lighting. Plasma needs a dark room to become beneficial and frankly not all of us live in caves. Whites on plasma are not white at all, especially in any sort of average lighting.

Color's not even an issue anymore with this year's batch of LCDs scoring better in many accuracy tests (compare the Sammy 4665 with the Pio 5080 geek boxes at CNET). The coveted Pio 5080 has some documented issues with greens and over-saturated red and blue primaries. Color accuracy has always been a strong point for plasma but now I'd say LCD and plasma are in parity there.

Backlight eveness is still a problem with LCD, especially in models over 50". We'll have to see how LED backlighting and local dimming zones work out over the next year. The technology looks promising but too nascent to endorse based on the first iteration, so I'll give you that one.

Then there's all the stuff that just sucks about plasmas. Heavy, hot, buzzing, flickering, dim ming, screen door effect, and how can I forget IR. Here's what happens when you play Bioshock for too long on your $3000 Pioneer 5080:

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/bbzzdd/5080-ir.jpg

I want a set I can watch, not one that I have to babysit with a 100-hour burn-in procedure following with routine screen wipes and de-IR procedures.

I don't want to sound like an LCD fanboy, because I think both technologies, when you add up the sum of all their faults and benefits come out about even. But all the plasma-superiority you hear on forums may have been valid in 2005, but today it's mostly bullocks.

 

[nageov3t]

weight was a big issue for me when I chose to buy an lcd.

when I had my old 36" crt, that thing was so heavy that I couldn't lift it by myself... it sucked having to get a friend to come over and help me every time I just wanted to rearrange furniture.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Chris
I don't want to sound like an LCD fanboy, because I think both technologies, when you add up the sum of all their faults and benefits come out about even. But all the plasma-superiority you hear on forums may have been valid in 2005, but today it's mostly bullocks.

Nope.

Plasma still offer the best quality. Nobody argues this. It's accepted fact.

 

[kalrith]

One of the big things going for LCDs is the higher level of brightness it can produce compared to plasmas. In a home, this is almost a non-issue, and I certainly think that plasmas at any price point produce a better picture than LCDs. However, what percentage of people research their television purchase? I would say that most people decide to buy a TV, go to the store they want to buy it from, look at all the TVs, and decide which one looks the best. In the extremely bright big-box-store setting, LCDs have a huge advantage with their higher brightness and matte screens.

I read an article (I'm not sure where) that concluded that people think the brightest TV is the best-looking TV. It did a test that showed several ISF-calibrated TVs along with a couple of TVs in "torch" mode (max brightness & contrast), and the majority of the people said the brightest TVs had the best picture. The average Joe doesn't realize that a blazingly bright TV that looks best on a wall of 100 TVs in a very bright store won't look that great when in his livingroom watching a movie on Saturday night. The average Joe also doesn't realize that products with the words Monster, Sony, or Bose on them are not automatically the highest-quality products in the store, but that's completely off this topic.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Chris
I don't want to sound like an LCD fanboy, because I think both technologies, when you add up the sum of all their faults and benefits come out about even. But all the plasma-superiority you hear on forums may have been valid in 2005, but today it's mostly bullocks.

Nope.

Plasma still offer the best quality. Nobody argues this. It's accepted fact.

Like I said in my post, that's a pretty outdated fact. Especially considering the strides LCD is making and how for the most part plasma technology has plateaued.

 

[kalrith]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Chris
I don't want to sound like an LCD fanboy, because I think both technologies, when you add up the sum of all their faults and benefits come out about even. But all the plasma-superiority you hear on forums may have been valid in 2005, but today it's mostly bullocks.

Nope.

Plasma still offer the best quality. Nobody argues this. It's accepted fact.

Like I said in my post, that's a pretty outdated fact. Especially considering the strides LCD is making and how for the most part plasma technology has plateaued.

So, if plasma technology has plateaued, then why do most/all of the professional reviews state that the new Pioneer plasmas are leaps and bounds ahead of any other flat-panel TV? Here's the link to the avsforum thread with all of the reviews, and here are a few excerpts:

The picture in particular is of a totally different class to most flat-screen televisions, and has us looking forward to the September launch of Pioneer's "premium" 'Full HD' screens -- with even higher contrast ratios, according to the manufacturer.

Pioneer's 8th-generation plasma is no hype... the PDP4280XD offers the best post-calibration picture quality I've seen to date. Deepest blacks among all the HDTVs we've tested.

Pioneer PDP508XD is the cream of a bunch of 8G Kuro plasmas that delivers class-leading picture quality. Deepest blacks with full preservation of shadow detail

Revolutionary black levels; Excellent colour fidelity; It's time to start believing the hype - Pioneer's latest-generation plasmas really do take image quality to a whole new level

The best flat TV picture ever; Not just the best 42-inch screen ever, it's the best flat screen yet by some margin.

The hype surrounding Pioneer's eighth-generation plasmas' revolutionary black level is fully justified. The Pioneer PDP4280XD is HDTVTest's current black-level champion, clocking in a minimum luminance that is more than 100% lower than that measured on our previous holder, the Panasonic TH42PH9. As a result, dynamic contrast ratio on the PDP4280XD also skyrocketed to a new record in excess of 3,000:1.

Normally we like to counterbalance our praise of even the very finest TVs with a negative point or two. But try as we might, we simply can?t think of anything bad to say about the Pioneer?s pictures at all. In fact, if it wasn?t for the fact that Pioneer is flogging the screen at what has to be considered quite a premium price point, the only problem the brand might have with the 508XD is making enough of them.

VERDICT
If the price isn't a problem, this should be one of the easiest buying decisions you'll ever have to make.

I will agree that LCDs are improving greatly, but so are plasmas. Plasmas are now available in 1080p, and the new Pioneers made a huge leap in black levels and contrast ratios this year. The Panasonic PX77U has an anti-glare coating that can rival some LCDs in full daylight. The next generation of Panasonic plasmas are supposed to make a huge decrease in power consumption as well, which will be an answer to another advantage that LCDs have over plasmas.

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Chris
I don't want to sound like an LCD fanboy, because I think both technologies, when you add up the sum of all their faults and benefits come out about even. But all the plasma-superiority you hear on forums may have been valid in 2005, but today it's mostly bullocks.

Nope.

Plasma still offer the best quality. Nobody argues this. It's accepted fact.

Like I said in my post, that's a pretty outdated fact. Especially considering the strides LCD is making and how for the most part plasma technology has plateaued.

No it's not. Believe what you want but while the best LCDs may be matching a 3 or 4 year old plasma (only in terms of black level), they have nothing on the newer Plasmas like the Panasonic or especially the Pioneer. You're ignoring the fact that this aspect of plasmas has also improved greatly.

Also, the fact that you would claim to need a pitch black room in order to see the benefits of Plasma shows your bias. That is nowhere near the truth. You only need normal everyday lighting that you would find in a typical home.

When I bought my 62u series Sharp LCD, people said the same thing (i.e. the plasma advantage is overblown). Now that I have the 700u Panasonic also, I can easily compare and notice the tremendous difference in overall picture quality. Granted, I'm comparing a 1 generation old LCD technology to current Plasma but the difference is pretty substantial.

And it's more than just better saturated colors and black levels. It's also the fact that the Plasmas produce a more believable lifelike picture while also handling motion better. If you own a plasma for a while, you will immediately notice when you are forced to watch an LCD at a friends house. It becomes pretty apparent. Both displays create a picture with very different characteristics and LCDs look artificial and washed out by comparison.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: DBL
When I bought my 62u series Sharp LCD, people said the same thing (i.e. the plasma advantage is overblown). Now that I have the 700u Panasonic also, I can easily compare and notice the tremendous difference in overall picture quality. Granted, I'm comparing a 1 generation old LCD technology to current Plasma but the difference is pretty substantial.

You're comparing a two-generation out LCD with a current Plasma, what do you expect? Even the newer Sharp 92u series can't compete with this year's Sammy and XBR4/5 sets. Sharp is falling behind Sony and Samsung in LCD advancements.

I had a 2006 Samsung LCD that I swapped out for the 2007 model and the difference was night and day. The 2006 model looked washed out all the time with charcoal blacks at best. The new Sammy (65 series, which isn't even the latest model) has blacks that match the bezel in all but the darkest conditions and the difference in colors was like comparing a pastel painting with an oil. I've seen the Pioneer 5080s in action, and they are impressive but not quite CRT-level good.

And it's more than just better saturated colors and black levels. It's also the fact that the Plasmas produce a more believable lifelike picture while also handling motion better. If you own a plasma for a while, you will immediately notice when you are forced to watch an LCD at a friends house. It becomes pretty apparent. Both displays create a picture with very different characteristics and LCDs look artificial and washed out by comparison.

LCD motion issues are solved with 120hz. Not to mention Plasma has similar motion lagging issues (though not as bad as 8ms LCD) and on top of that phosphor lag, etc. Check out the lag on the coveted 5080:

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/bbzzdd/5080-motionlag.jpg

The problem is LCD is evolving so quickly you get people comparing plasma to an even one-year-old LCD and claiming plasma is 100x better. It's BS. Put a 71 series Sammy against the current Panny, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to pick a winner. The 8G Pios are another class, and yeah they got LCD beat, but for the price I would hope so.

 

[kalrith]

LCD motion issues are solved with 120hz. Not to mention Plasma has similar motion lagging issues (though not as bad as 8ms LCD) and on top of that phosphor lag, etc. Check out the lag on the coveted 5080:

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/bbzzdd/5080-motionlag.jpg

The problem is LCD is evolving so quickly you get people comparing plasma to an even one-year-old LCD and claiming plasma is 100x better. It's BS. Put a 71 series Sammy against the current Panny, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to pick a winner. The 8G Pios are another class, and yeah they got LCD beat, but for the price I would hope so.

You've mentioned a very important aspect to any purchase--price. I can (and will) get the Pioneer 5080 from the avsforum sponsors or Amazon.com for $2,600 shipped. If I wanted to spend less, I can get the Panasonic 50PX75U for $1,454 shipped from frys.com. Show me a 52" or even 46-47" LCD at either of those prices with equivalent picture quality! For comparison, the cheapest price I could find on the 52XBR4 was $3,800 shipped, and I think it's safe to say that the Pioneer bests it in picture quality.

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: Chris

Originally posted by: DBL
When I bought my 62u series Sharp LCD, people said the same thing (i.e. the plasma advantage is overblown). Now that I have the 700u Panasonic also, I can easily compare and notice the tremendous difference in overall picture quality. Granted, I'm comparing a 1 generation old LCD technology to current Plasma but the difference is pretty substantial.

You're comparing a two-generation out LCD with a current Plasma, what do you expect? Even the newer Sharp 92u series can't compete with this year's Sammy and XBR4/5 sets. Sharp is falling behind Sony and Samsung in LCD advancements.

I had a 2006 Samsung LCD that I swapped out for the 2007 model and the difference was night and day. The 2006 model looked washed out all the time with charcoal blacks at best. The new Sammy (65 series, which isn't even the latest model) has blacks that match the bezel in all but the darkest conditions and the difference in colors was like comparing a pastel painting with an oil. I've seen the Pioneer 5080s in action, and they are impressive but not quite CRT-level good.

And it's more than just better saturated colors and black levels. It's also the fact that the Plasmas produce a more believable lifelike picture while also handling motion better. If you own a plasma for a while, you will immediately notice when you are forced to watch an LCD at a friends house. It becomes pretty apparent. Both displays create a picture with very different characteristics and LCDs look artificial and washed out by comparison.

LCD motion issues are solved with 120hz. Not to mention Plasma has similar motion lagging issues (though not as bad as 8ms LCD) and on top of that phosphor lag, etc. Check out the lag on the coveted 5080:

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/bbzzdd/5080-motionlag.jpg

The problem is LCD is evolving so quickly you get people comparing plasma to an even one-year-old LCD and claiming plasma is 100x better. It's BS. Put a 71 series Sammy against the current Panny, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to pick a winner. The 8G Pios are another class, and yeah they got LCD beat, but for the price I would hope so.

The 62u is 1 generation old technology from sharp. The 82u and 92u are current and of the same generation (at least when the 700u Panasonic was released). If you are factoring in other brands like Samsung to declare that Sharp is 2 generations old, then using the same logic, the new Panasonics would also be 1 generation old since the Pioneers are available. Bottom line, there is a 1 generation difference.

I seriously doubt that the Samsung panel could match the new Panasonic in terms of black levels but I never made that direct comparison. Do you have any reputable links?

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: kalrith
You've mentioned a very important aspect to any purchase--price. I can (and will) get the Pioneer 5080 from the avsforum sponsors or Amazon.com for $2,600 shipped. If I wanted to spend less, I can get the Panasonic 50PX75U for $1,454 shipped from frys.com. Show me a 52" or even 46-47" LCD at either of those prices with equivalent picture quality! For comparison, the cheapest price I could find on the 52XBR4 was $3,800 shipped, and I think it's safe to say that the Pioneer bests it in picture quality.

I'll give you price. Being older and cheaper LCDs cannot compete with older and cheaper plasmas, you got a case there. If you go with the Panny though you're missing some of the good stuff on newer sets like HDMI 1.3 (xvYCC and wide range) and 1080p (yeah... whole other can of worms) but it's still a good buy.

 

[dwell]

Originally posted by: DBL
I seriously doubt that the Samsung panel could match the new Panasonic in terms of black levels but I never made that direct comparison. Do you have any reputable links?

CNET good enough? This is comparing a last-generation Samsung (the one I own) to the Panasonic TH-50PX77U. The newer models (71 and 81) up the ante.

To get an idea of the Samsung's real-world performance, we watched Hulk on HD DVD played from the Toshiba HD-XA2 at 1080i resolution. By way of comparison, we lined the LN-T4665F up next to a trio of like-size flat-panels: the HP LC4776N 1080p LCD, the aforementioned Panasonic TH-50PX77U plasma, and our oft-cited reference display, the Pioneer PRO-FHD1 plasma.

...

We originally wrote that the Panasonic beat the Samsung by a hair in terms of procing the deepest black level, but actually the reverse is true. After rea-adjusting the two slightly, the Samsung produced a slightly deeper black level than the Panaosnic, although again the difference would be difficult to discern outside of a side-by-side comparison.

http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-p...-32306311.html?tag=txt