Just for the sake of argument :) The Panasonic Plasmas at Best Buy today give excellent blacks, but I chose to steer clear of Plasmas for a few reasons, one being weight. The same size TV in Plasma is double the weight of the LCD. I went from a 30 inch CRT Samsung (WHF3098TXN) to the LCD and it was night and day. The CRT had malfunction issues as well. But back on subject, the Plasma also gave a picture I wasn't to fond of. Instead of a smooth picture surface, you can see more grain on the plasmas and the phosphors. So, for the sake of argument, I love the LCD (Took me years to switch over) and the weight decrease is damn near sexual!
I don't know, this LNT-4665F provides such detail that it reveals grain and video artifacting out more than any TV I've previously owned. I doubt Plasma would accentuate further (or else there's something seriously wrong with my TV/setup. :P)
I don't really see how weight matters - I don't care how much my TV weighs while I'm watching it. I guess it could matter if you're moving it by yourself, but that's about the only situation I can think of.
One thing I do agree with - LCD has a "smoother" picture (I'm not talking about motion, but doing something like displaying a picture of the sky with a steady gradient. Plasmas dither by flickering pixels off and on, so it can be a bit "coarser" of an image sometimes. That's the only thing I see that LCDs have over plasma from a performance standpoint.
@the person that was talking about me comparing at Best Buy...
I wasn't comparing at BB, I was comparing at my office at an electronics manufacturer, using a high quality HDMI distribution amplifier fed by a Blu-ray and HD DVD source.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Sean @ Sep 29th 2007 1:30AM
Just for the sake of argument :) The Panasonic Plasmas at Best Buy today give excellent blacks, but I chose to steer clear of Plasmas for a few reasons, one being weight. The same size TV in Plasma is double the weight of the LCD. I went from a 30 inch CRT Samsung (WHF3098TXN) to the LCD and it was night and day. The CRT had malfunction issues as well. But back on subject, the Plasma also gave a picture I wasn't to fond of. Instead of a smooth picture surface, you can see more grain on the plasmas and the phosphors. So, for the sake of argument, I love the LCD (Took me years to switch over) and the weight decrease is damn near sexual!
-dad
Vince @ Sep 29th 2007 5:06AM
I don't know, this LNT-4665F provides such detail that it reveals grain and video artifacting out more than any TV I've previously owned. I doubt Plasma would accentuate further (or else there's something seriously wrong with my TV/setup. :P)
TrentD @ Sep 29th 2007 8:44AM
Sean,
I don't really see how weight matters - I don't care how much my TV weighs while I'm watching it. I guess it could matter if you're moving it by yourself, but that's about the only situation I can think of.
One thing I do agree with - LCD has a "smoother" picture (I'm not talking about motion, but doing something like displaying a picture of the sky with a steady gradient. Plasmas dither by flickering pixels off and on, so it can be a bit "coarser" of an image sometimes. That's the only thing I see that LCDs have over plasma from a performance standpoint.
@the person that was talking about me comparing at Best Buy...
I wasn't comparing at BB, I was comparing at my office at an electronics manufacturer, using a high quality HDMI distribution amplifier fed by a Blu-ray and HD DVD source.