2006-07-23 11:17:25 · 9 answers · asked by b_sombru 1 in Consumer Electronics ➔ TVs
depends on many usage factors, after a lot of research I went with plasma
2006-07-23 11:20:44 · answer #1 · answered by alaskanecho 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There are positives and negatives to both. Here is a summary of differences:
Picture quality of plasma is brighter, better color, better blacks than LCD. (There is something about looking directly at glowing phosphors!)
Sharpness is the same for equivalent pixel counts. Some newer LCDs have 1080 x 1920 resolution, most plasmas still in the 720 x 1280 range.
Plasma is heavier and uses more power than flat panel LCD.
There are reports that plasmas are not as reliable or they don't last as long, but that is no longer true with the latest models. Plasma phosphors dim slowly over time (but not as fast as CRT phosphors); but direct view LCDs use flourescent lamps which also dim and eventually burn out (some are replaceable). Projection LCD sets have bulbs of limited life, but are replaceable and the lifetime is a few thousand hours of viewing.
Plasmas are subject to burn-in. A stationary image left on the screen for a long time could produce a permanent ghost image. The most risk is when viewing a lot of 4:3 ratio pictures (non-HD), which are displayed with vertical dark areas on the left and right to fill in the wide screen. There are ways to minimize this, however. many sets have a "stretch" mode which widens the picture to fill the whole screen. I would not use a plasma for playing video games.
Plasmas come in larger sizes, although large flat panel LCDs are coming out, but they are expensive. LCD projectors can be 70".
LCD contrast and brightness can be reduced when viewing from off-center (both flat and projector, but sets will vary).
2006-07-24 14:49:35 · answer #2 · answered by gp4rts 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
definitely LCD. It's a common news in Australia that plasma TV does not last longer than a LCD or a flat tv. besides, fixing plasma is much more expensive than LCD. Based on a newspaper in Sydney, the average life of a plasma is only 5 years. the average life for lcd is unknown for now, since there has been no significant news regarding LCD.
i use an LCD monitor for my computer, i bought it in 2000, and it's still working fine, the only problem with it is just it is out of style.
2006-07-23 16:56:17 · answer #3 · answered by didy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Being a repairman, I see alot of both. They both seem to have their downfalls, but when all is said and done, I would tell you to go lcd. The longevity of life on a plasma just isn't there. Even the professional series plasmas have terrible burn in issues. Choose wisely. I tend to like the samsung lcd's over anyone else's as well. Sony has an extremely nice lcd, but it seems to have more issues than the others do. Hope this helps.
2006-07-23 12:59:47 · answer #4 · answered by JAJW98 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Over several years the color on a plasma gradually fades.
So I would say for the long haul go with L.C.D.
2006-07-23 11:34:48 · answer #5 · answered by billybetters2 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both are long-running technologies.
Plasma is rated 60,000-hours until half brightness, which means it will still work, but not as bright as when you purchse it.
TFT LCD is also rated 60,000-hours but ONLY on the backlight, once the lamp is out is out and you cannot replace it.
2006-07-23 17:02:37 · answer #6 · answered by lelekid4ever 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LCD because Plasma burns itself out and dissipates
2006-07-23 11:20:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Smegma.
2006-07-23 11:20:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
LCD because of fading not to mention burn in.
2006-07-23 14:50:12 · answer #9 · answered by El Duderino 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋