Logik LCD 47V87GP vs LG 42LD420 any experience

S

Smokey_sa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
283
Reaction score
0
Location
Tableview Cape Town
Hello all,

I am planing to buy a LCD at last and after some research I have narrowed it down to the 2 mentioned above.

I will mainly use it as TV (HD at a later point) and connect my PC to it to watch movies.

Has anyone got any experience with these 2?

I am leaning towards the LG as the reviews I found were mainly positive.

Regards

Paul
 
what are the prices of these models? i would suggest you go for a samsung instead
 
I have no idea on pricing - so I can't recommend a model.

But Sony and Samsung are generally considered the two best makers. When it comes to PC monitors or LCD screens, Samsung is my first option.
 
A friend of mine recently bought a Sinotec 42" and the picture ghosts worse than a monochrome green screen, a complete POS. Not sure if the Logik will be much better.
 
Smokey_sa said:
Hello all,

I am planing to buy a LCD at last and after some research I have narrowed it down to the 2 mentioned above.

I will mainly use it as TV (HD at a later point) and connect my PC to it to watch movies.

Has anyone got any experience with these 2?

I am leaning towards the LG as the reviews I found were mainly positive.

Regards

Paul
Click to expand...

For TV, plasma is best.

42" Samsung plasma is about R6000 and very popular.

Just remember that static images, especially with a lot of contrast, are likely to burn into the screen. Example, if connected to a PC and the "Start bar" is displayed constantly for a few hours without a break, it will burn in into the screen. Same goes for black bars, channel logos, etc. (although ad breaks "clear" the logo/screen).

For decent TV on LCD, you will need to pay more for a higher end model, such as the Samsung 40" 6 Series at ±R10,000.
 
Wow are you like the Plasma brigade? Do you hop into every post and punt plasma? Do you get commission from someone, the OP never mentioned a plasma at all in his request, he wanted to know out of the two mentioned which was the better option. I'd probably personally lean towards the LG myself, though I do have a little 24" Logik in the room and it's not to bad for it's price.
 
Lupus said:
Wow are you like the Plasma brigade? Do you hop into every post and punt plasma? Do you get commission from someone, the OP never mentioned a plasma at all in his request, he wanted to know out of the two mentioned which was the better option. I'd probably personally lean towards the LG myself, though I do have a little 24" Logik in the room and it's not to bad for it's price.
Click to expand...

I hop into every post/thread where plasma is a good option to consider. And to date, everyone I've convinced/given input to to get plasma is ecstatic with their decision, bar one case of image retention, where the screen was probably not used in accordance with the manual.

Unfortunately plasma has been forgotten by most, and only LCD and LED-backlit LCD tend to get pushed.

Instead of getting p*ssed off at me, rather point out where I am wrong...

Maybe you need to get a plasma. ;) :D
 
I think you need to get an LCD and start realising that LCD's have grown a lot in the few years they've been out, they are not that the archaic low CDM, low response time things they used to be. Normal TV viewing is 100% fine on modern LCD's and have been for 2 years or so, I've seen comparative plasmas and you know what in 90% of the time the differences are marginal between the two. It's a dying tech and hasn't been updated in awhile, if the OP mentions two LCD's don't hop on and mention a plasma, if he mentioned a plasma in the mix then yes give your opinion.
 
I have a 32" LCD and very happy with it. Would gladly recommend it for anyone buying in this size.

But for > 40" screens, I'm going to go with Potman. I just saw the newer Plasmas and it blew me away. I'm getting either a 42" or 50" in a couple of months and it will only be Plasma, nothing else. Picture is so smooth and warm, unlike the LCD wich are rather rough and cold - my one bud has 42" Sammy Plasma and a 40" LCD and its day & night.

Plasma has improved a lot and 18mths ago it was considered dead, its now the Lazarus of screens and seems to be what to go for in 2011.
 
Lupus said:
I think you need to get an LCD and start realising that LCD's have grown a lot in the few years they've been out, they are not that the archaic low CDM, low response time things they used to be. Normal TV viewing is 100% fine on modern LCD's and have been for 2 years or so, I've seen comparative plasmas and you know what in 90% of the time the differences are marginal between the two. It's a dying tech and hasn't been updated in awhile, if the OP mentions two LCD's don't hop on and mention a plasma, if he mentioned a plasma in the mix then yes give your opinion.
Click to expand...

This post is full of lies. Fact is, TV viewing on entry-mid range LCDs regardless of whether they're modern or not, is cr*p. Most LCD owners admit to this, so I'm not sure how this fact escaped you. Plasma is not a dying tech, it has been updated, and the highest end plasmas are still rated the best TVs in the world, fact.

Fortunately most people I know are fairly affluent so I have seen and compared dozens of LCDs and plasmas.

Maybe re-read my post, the bit about plasma never being mentioned. Does the OP even know what plasma is and how it could benefit him/her? These are questions you obviously haven't asked yourself before responding.
 
I also think Postman is stuck a few years ago :/

LCD has made massive progress in the past and - as pointed out above - the differences are marginal. For what I need, a plasma is out of the question and I'm very happy with my choice. I also know a number of affluent people where a budget is not too much of a concern. They all have LCD and I bucked the tread by going plasma. I've now traded to LCD and have no issues.

And I can point out (again) a few points that you're wrong, if you wish?
If I recall, plasma was ahead on motion only - and slightly at that?
Black levels nowadays aren't a worry.

I don't think plasma is the one to watch in 2011. Every year they have a manufacturer closing their 'plasma' house to focus on LCD. There are only 3 makers right now and - if rumour is correct - there'll be only two manufactures by end 2011.

No one can tell the future - but if that manufacturer does pull out, there's a good chance of plasma shutting down entirely by end 2012.
 
Dolby said:
I also think Postman is stuck a few years ago :/

LCD has made massive progress in the past and - as pointed out above - the differences are marginal. For what I need, a plasma is out of the question and I'm very happy with my choice. I also know a number of affluent people where a budget is not too much of a concern. They all have LCD and I bucked the tread by going plasma. I've now traded to LCD and have no issues.

And I can point out (again) a few points that you're wrong, if you wish?

I don't think plasma is the one to watch in 2011. Every year they have a manufacturer closing their 'plasma' house to focus on LCD. There are only 3 makers right now and - if rumour is correct - there'll be only two manufactures by end 2011.

No one can tell the future - but if that manufacturer does pull out, there's a good chance of plasma shutting down entirely by end 2012.
Click to expand...

Then the recent purchasers of plasma on this very forum must be stuck in the past too. Does not seem to be the case after they chose plasma after comparing it to similarly priced LCDs!

Please reread my post - I was not arguing that LCD hasn't made progress.

The differences for TV/sport viewing (can I be any clearer?) are were plasma convincingly wins. This is my point.

And Dolby, you've compared your LCD to your older generation plasma. In terms of price, your LCD would have cost a lot more at the time, so it's an unfair comparison. Again you're comparing cheaper plasma vs more expensive LCD, where I have admitted and even sometimes recommend, higher end LCD is almost as good for TV/sport.

Plasma manufacturers are irrelevant to the fact that plasma is still the best TV, especially for sport. LCD manufacturers have improved on and make more money out of LCD.

Keep beating that drum, old boy!
 
...and the Plasma vs LCD war rages on :D

I recently purchased a Samsung 40" Full HD lcd for R6799 (LA40C530) and as I've said in a previous post or two, Dstv SD sport looks k@k on it BUT anything HD or full HD (or PS3 games) looks stunning. The tv's built in media player works like a charm.

@ OP: If you're deciding between the two, I'd go for the LG.
 
It’s strange how people with LCD’s always try and convince themselves that LCD is better than Plasma, if you bought a LCD and you are happy with it, good for you, I am happy that you are happy with your buy, and your electrical bill will also be a tad lighter than that of a plasma owner, but all that set aside, I am sorry to inform you that Plasma is better, it’s not only my personal opinion, it’s an actual fact
Plasma has a better overall picture performance, Plasma has a clean advantage when it comes to viewing angles, Picture resolution is the same, with LCD’s you don’t have burn-ins, and it’s better for computers (for those who care), but LCD’s are prone to have and get bad pixels, and besides that, ALL LCD’s have blurry images some or other time, its pixel response time is not as good as with plasma

LCD has got its advantages, but when it comes to the actual viewing pleasure, Plasma wins hands down
 
NBS said:
. . .

LCD has got its advantages, but when it comes to the actual viewing pleasure, Plasma wins hands down
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm sure. One day when I'm big I'll get myself a 50" FHD plasma for the lounge and then do a side by side comparison with my current 40" FHD lcd when I'm bored. Until then... well, I'll just have to pretend I'm happy with my lcd and keep telling myself I bought it by accident and deep down I really wanted a plasma :p
 
NBS said:
It’s strange how people with LCD’s always try and convince themselves that LCD is better than Plasma
Click to expand...

... it's the exact same the other way around?

Though I've generally found the pro-plasma brigade have only plasma. I know a few of the guys who are pro LCD have had both or - in one occasion at least - plasma, LCD and LED.

LCD advantages had me chosing it over a plasma. The image retention which I was told was dead, it still there - and my number one reason for moving over.
 
Great argument there. Your strawman is covered in crow poop! :D

No one has denied image retention. It just doesn't affect us. Good for you if LCD suits your static images better. Don't go and then comment on which is better for TV/sport when you chose your LCD for gaming and only average TV/sport quality!
 
I don't think I've ever commented LCD is better for sport?

And you denied image retention yourself?

What the informed ones have told us is the difference isn't as large as you make out
 
Dolby said:
I don't think I've ever commented LCD is better for sport?
Click to expand...

Plasma is the clear winner for TV/sport.

And you denied image retention yourself?
Click to expand...

Strange then why I recommend LCD/LED to gamers/PC users.

What the informed ones have told us is the difference isn't as large as you make out
Click to expand...

I agree. Except when it comes to TV/sport. For movies, DVDs and other media, yes LCD does come close to plasma and difference is not that large.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X