LED vs Plasma

I cant believe the rubbish that is being posted here, plasma sucks big time, they suffer from image burn and they have a short life span (the tubes leak).

Ive seen 2 PS3's ,one connected to a plasma via HDMI at full res and one connected to a LCD via HDMI at full res and the LCD was much more clearer, the plasma TV had a few dark spots and flickering was noticed.

LCD/LED displays are much cheaper than plasma.
 
Last edited:
Rickster said:
I cant believe the rubbish that is being posted here, plasma sucks big time, they suffer from image burn and they have a short life span (the tubes leak).

Ive seen 2 PS3's ,one connected to a plasma via HDMI at full res and one connected to a LCD via HDMI at full res and the LCD was much more clearer, the plasma TV had a few dark spots and flickering was noticed.

LCD/LED displays are much cheaper than plasma.
Click to expand...

What are you smoking?

http://www.rtings.com/info/lcd-vs-led-vs-plasma
 
Speedster said:
What are you smoking?

http://www.rtings.com/info/lcd-vs-led-vs-plasma
Click to expand...

Basically that article is saying plasma's dont last as long as LCD/LED, are heavier than LCD/LED, more expensive than LED/LCD, use more power than LED/LCD....see were im going?

And if OP is in a (most likely) well lit room it will reflect.

I bought a Sony Bravia BX450 (40" Full HD LCD 1080p) for R4000 from makro...and that thing is crystal clear when watching BR movies via HDMI


Why wouldnt the OP buy something like that?
 
Rickster - There are a lot of advantages with plasmas, such as better contrast ratios and darker blacks.

Screen burn-in doesn't seem to be a problem anymore and as I said before, I don't care about energy costs. The same goes for heat production... just in case that's the next thing people are going to try and bring down plasmas with. Furthermore, I've actually found that plasmas are cheaper than LEDs. The LEDs seem to be the trend lately, and get more focus and more of the modern features in which I'm not interested (eg. 3D and internet TV).

The main reason I haven't rushed to a store and bought an LED is because of the complaints about refresh rates. Plasmas have 600hz, so no motion blur during fast moving scenes. The best LEDs still only have 240. The LEDs within my budged have 120, some even 60. This means that, according to the manufacturers at least, compensation is needed in the form of image processing.

Samsung uses what they call "clear motion", which is basically motion interpolation. Motion interpolation creates the soap opera effect, which I can't stand.

Yes, it can be turned off, but then, according to theory, I will get blur, which is also horrible.

As mentioned previously though, what I don't understand is how I haven't seen any of the aforementioned blur on during my years of gaming and watching fast moving scenes on my 60hz Samsung monitor. Unfortunately for me, none of this really makes sense right now. Practical experience conflicting the information I find online.
 
Last edited:
Bl1zz4rd said:
Plasmas have 600hz, so no motion blur during fast moving scenes. The best LEDs still only have 240. The LEDs within my budged have 120, some even 60. This means that, according to the manufacturers at least, compensation is needed in the form of image processing.
Click to expand...
Plasmas still only display a max of 60 fps (Hz), but they do display each frame up to 10 times (hence the 600Hz marketing label). These fields, as they are call, are required to dither the full range of millions of colours, as natively Plasma panels can only display a much more limited number.

Motion handling is however a far more complex topic then you've indicated.
 
Last edited:
Doesnt high Hz make the movie look like its in 2x speed?

It looks so crap...
 
Rickster said:
Doesnt high Hz make the movie look like its in 2x speed?
Click to expand...
Depends whats happening during those Hz (frames).

Rickster said:
It looks so crap...
Click to expand...
As above, ever wonder why watching a movie in a theater has good motion, even though the source material is only 24 fps (Hz)? Or why a 60Hz CRT TV has better motion than a 60Hz Plasma or 60Hz LCD/LED?
 
Last edited:
ToxicBunny said:
Agreed, but I've seen it done by all the big brands before.

Its an argument PP and I have had a few times as well :)...

Personally I prefer LCD/LED to Plasma, but that is just a personal preference, because they almost on a par once you get equivalent spec systems.
Click to expand...

What do you mean? 1024x768 is 1024x768 and is not FHD...

Perhaps the argument is about perceivable definition the effect viewing distance has on it?
 
ToxicBunny said:
As an addendum (and this is my personal opinion), HD Ready plasma panels should not be sold.. purely because of the 1024x768 resolution on a 16:9 screen format...
Click to expand...

But the pixels are rectangular... And the screen retains the 16:9 aspect ratio. Best of both SD and HD worlds, some say.
 
http://www.televisioninfo.com/ratings.php

35hgxdw.jpg
 
Rickster - It's not about speed, it's about fluidity and LED TV tech not being on par, and therefore having to make up for it by means of clear motion and the like.

Roman4604 - I have no doubt that it is more complex, but the topic at hand is not the inner workings of interpolation, it's what the technology means for the end user. How it affects my viewing experience and compares to that of plasmas.
 
Bl1zz4rd said:
but the topic at hand is not the inner workings of interpolation
Click to expand...
Well there's your problem, thinking all that high refresh rate LED do is interpolation. Features like Samsung's Clear Motion Rate are more than just that.

Something else to consider, if standard 60/600Hz Plasma motion is perfect, why would Panasonic develop something like their Focused Field Drive feature (now up to 3000Hz) for their high end sets?

Both the above relate to my previous cinema & CRT motion remarks. Anyway back to your initial post, for PC use an HDR Plasma isn't going to be great due to the scaling. There are also still some minor issues even if you do go for a 1080p Plasma.
 
Last edited:
Roman4604 said:
Something else to consider, if standard 60/600Hz Plasma motion is perfect, why would Panasonic develop something like their Focused Field Drive feature (now up to 3000Hz) for their high end sets?
Click to expand...

Probably, because these brands need some "edge" over competition. In the old days it was build quality and contrast, now with everything Made In PRC, it's probably these features.

I don't know about you, but most movies are shot on film, still, and watching them in 600MHz with interpolation gives them an ugly "video look".
 
Space_Chief said:
Probably, because these brands need some "edge" over competition. In the old days it was build quality and contrast, now with everything Made In PRC, it's probably these features.

I don't know about you, but most movies are shot on film, still, and watching them in 600MHz with interpolation gives them an ugly "video look".
Click to expand...
Interpolation (mathematically derived intermediate frames) is old school technology and not the main method by which TV manufacturers are trying to improve motion handling going forward. Sure its still there on LEDs & some high end Plasmas, but its now playing a minor bit part (if enabled).

Samsung's Clear Motion Rate on LEDs and Panasonic's Focused Field Drive on Plasmas both aim to mimic the the motion handling mechanisms used by cinemas and CRTs, which has nothing to do with interpolation.
 
Roman4604 said:
Interpolation (mathematically derived intermediate frames) is old school technology and not the main method by which TV manufacturers are trying to improve motion handling going forward. Sure its still there on LEDs & some high end Plasmas, but its now playing a minor bit part (if enabled).

Samsung's Clear Motion Rate on LEDs and Panasonic's Focused Field Drive on Plasmas both aim to mimic the the motion handling mechanisms used by cinemas and CRTs, which has nothing to do with interpolation.
Click to expand...

CRTs?

Yes, but the effect is the same, isn't it. Your aim is to get smoother movement which is COOL for video games, but sucks for 35mm film. I looked recently at a higher end Sony in the V&A Waterfront Sony store and the movie was terrible. It gave the movie a cheap interlaced video look.
 
Roman4604 said:
Using the methods by which these high marketing Hz for motion are derived, a CRT would rate at roughly 1000Hz.
Click to expand...

They're great for marketing though. Most important things are, resolution - which is standard in all sets, contrast, viewing angle and colour reproduction. If you game, you want a high refresh rate and good interpolation or whatever current marketing buzzwords for that are. TV should reproduce film faithfully. And for HFR video content, sure.

I'm purely referring to the motion aspect not picture fidelity.
Click to expand...

Yes I'm referring to the motion aspect too. It just looks bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X