[Bob15]

This is becoming an age-old question/rivalry, but someone asked me this question the other day with respect to the under 45" inch category in terms of better picture and I couldn't answer the difference.  Anyone knowledgeable in this area?

[jqp]

I prefer LCD in principle and probably would choose it if I had to settle.

Plasma tends to blur things, but can look good when done right (e.g Pioneer Elite)

LCD should be as crisp as your PC monitor, but effective dot pitch and pixel response issues can be limiting in the big sizes.

Of course you are always settling due to economics and influence of big business.

I will likely not get away from my 40" CRT until you can see all the movements in the shadows in the folds of Gandalf's robes on some other type of display. (Not sure where I read about this example of what to look for in video quality, but it is a good example of what I demand when I spend the big bucks for video).

[zybar]

I would still give the nod to Plasma.  

You will get better contrast and black level with the plasma while the LCD will generally have a little better color saturation.  

However, the LCD will be significantly more expensive as you approach the 42-45" size.  If the size is in the 30's the pricing is a little closer.

However, I would strongly suggest looking at pj's (front and rear) before buying a Plasma or LCD flat planel.

Front pj's have come down in price and you can now get a killer unit from Panasonic or Sanyo at the $2k price point.  Both pj's will out peform either the plasma or lcd at a fraction of the price (even just projecting on a wall without a screen).  In a small size under (80") you will have much less of issue with the picture being washed out unless there is a large amount of direct light hitting the image.

On the rear pj front, you will be able to get a slightly larger image at a higher resolution for less money in units that are getting slimmer and slimmer (6-9" deep).

It's a good time to be buying video these days...

For much more in depth info, you can spend some time over at avsforum.com or check out any of the HT mags.

Good luck.

George

[Carlman]

I prefer RPTV in 4:3 format personally.  Plasma uses as much power as a hair dryer, hums, and is generally inferior in PQ to me.  LCD is flat and the blacks aren't black.

I wanted a flat-panel monitor but couldn't understand what the craze was about looking that actual PQ in the stores.  I ended up buying the 16:9 aspect ratio and couldn't be less pleased with it.  1% of TV broadcast uses that format.  So, I wish I'd bought the 4:3 as I wanted to in the first place... could've saved another $800...

I agree the Pioneer Elite's can look good (for a flat panel) but the last one I saw was very expensive... $8,k or so?  Whereas the $2,k Sony RPTV I bought looked just as good.  

Front Projectors are a good option, not sure which one(s) if you don't want to constantly battle with stretch modes, black bars, etc.  If I wasn't using a corner for my set, the projector would've been a better route for me.

[zybar]

I prefer RPTV in 4:3 format personally.  Plasma uses as much power as a hair dryer, hums, and is generally inferior in PQ to me.  LCD is flat and the blacks aren't black.

I wanted a flat-panel monitor but couldn't understand what the craze was about looking that actual PQ in the stores.  I ended up buying the 16:9 aspect ratio and couldn't be less pleased with it.  1% of TV broadcast uses that format.  So, I wish I'd bought the 4:3 as I wanted to in the first place... could've saved another $800...

I ...

Carl,

I think you are a little off on some of your comments...

Plasma units no longer hum and certainly aren't inferior in PQ when you comapre apples to apples (same size and resolution).

Way more than 1% of TV content is in HD format these days.  All prime time content from major and minor networks is broadcast in HD (how you get it will depend on where you live) as well as lots of content from cable/sat channels).

There was just an article in this month's Home Theater mag that measured how much power is consumed by a variety of devices.  The results might suprise you (i.e. the RP tv uses basically the same as the plasma to output the same brightness).

Anyway, not trying to convince you to change your thoughts, but more wanting to make sure info is accurate and not out of date.

George

[Bob15]

Thanks everyone for the quick replies.  Projectors do not make a whole lot of sense for this person looking to put a 40+" set in his den in an entertainment center.       Regardless, he'd be spending way too much money on a new bulb every 4-6 months and his room has too much ambient light.

[Woodsea]

Every 4-6 months?  He must not have a job, and watch 10 hours a day
Panasonic ae900 is the one to get now, if he watches a reasonable amount.

[Carlman]

You're likely right, George... the video technology is clearly moving quickly... That's news to me that Plasma's aren't noisy, it was just a year ago I was looking at them again... and the video quality still isn't great in what I see (comparing to RPTV) in the stores I go... So, scratch my comments about Plasma...

I'm mainly frustrated with what's available to ME in HD, though... I bought the HD box from Time Warner cable company and enjoyed about 3 or 4 channels that used actual HD cameras and broadcasts on a regular basis.  TNT, Showtime, HBO, etc.. were mostly just regular stuff in whatever mode they chose... stretch/zoom/etc.. and didn't look much (if any) better than regular digital cable.

I'm looking forward to having a reason to own a 16:9 HD, though...  one day... Currently, it's not worth it for the few things I can get.  I find it odd that 90% of TV's are designed for a format that maybe 10% (now?) are broadcast.

-C

[bubba966]

George has said it as well as I could've. If I had to go for either an LCD or Plasma it'd be plasma (especially in the 42"-45" size).

But I wouldn't go for a flat panel display. Too expensive and the quality is lacking. A good CRT direct view tube is still the best choice for PQ.

Why not look at Sony's 34" XBR 16:9 set (assuming that 16:9 is wanted)? Or maybe one of their 36" XBR's if 4:3 is preferred.

[zybar]

You're likely right, George... the video technology is clearly moving quickly... That's news to me that Plasma's aren't noisy, it was just a year ago I was looking at them again... and the video quality still isn't great in what I see (comparing to RPTV) in the stores I go... So, scratch my comments about Plasma...

I'm mainly frustrated with what's available to ME in HD, though... I bought the HD box from Time Warner cable company and enjoyed about 3 or 4 channels that used actual HD cameras and broadca ...

I sometimes forget that being in the NYC market gets me more HD content than most areas.

Also, since most people hold onto their tv for 5+ yrs, you want to buy something that will serve you moving into the future.  More and more content will show up and "eventually" all broadcasts will be digital and widescreen (probably by 2010).

Don't go so much by what you see in a store unless it is a small shop that actually takes the time to setup it up properly (unlikely).  I have seen some awesome displays that look like total shit at the store.

In terms of PQ, I agree that a well calibrated XBR CRT unit will look better, but since their size stops at 34" that really isn't any option.  But the digital options are getting very close...

Getting back to the original post, Bob, have your buddy get cabinet dimesnions and see what will fit into his entertainment center.  I would still go with a slim profile RPTV as my first choice and a Panny Plasma as my second choice since the front pj is not an option.

George

[fredgarvin]

Dish Network is carrying HDNET for 9.95 monthly which includes HD movie channels and sports etc. Mark Cuban owned network with favorable reviews. i am signing up soon to use with my 50" RPTV. My future plans are for a projector. I do think the smaller 20" LCD's are nice, and cheap, for a bedroom system. Plasma does not offer enough for its price point.

[brj]

So who is currently making the HD capable rear-projection display that sits at the sweetspot intersection of picture quality and shallow depth?

[JeffB]

A couple of other things that you might consider are display resolution.  A rear projection LCD or DLP can have upto 1024 lines.  Many of the plasma and pure LCD displays are 480 lines or 768 lines, especially on the less expensive models.  This only matters, however, if you can watch high definition content.

Many DVDs are in widescreen format with 480 lines of resolution.  CRT displays are more like 360 lines of resolution.

Sony has come out with new LCDs in the last 3 months that have significantly better blacks.  I forget what they are calling the new technology.  You can look for blacks on LCDs to get better in the future.

I have a 50" rear projection LCD.  I am very happy with it, but 50" in my small room looks a lot bigger than 50" in a big store.  It takes up a good chunk of the corner of my room.  I sometimes wish I had a TV that would hang on the wall to provide more space and a cooler aesthetic.

I only notice the problem with black levels on particularly dark scenes.  Something like Dark City does not look so great.  However, whites are fantastic, like in Vertical Limit.

Then there are the displays of the future.  Carbon nanotubes promise an ultrathin display with an electron gun behind every pixel.  Although you might be waiting 10 years for this.

[jqp]

In terms of PQ, I agree that a well calibrated XBR CRT unit will look better, but since their size stops at 34" that really isn't any option.

Mine is 40"

[zybar]

In terms of PQ, I agree that a well calibrated XBR CRT unit will look better, but since their size stops at 34" that really isn't any option.

Mine is 40"

Widescreen?

I thought only RCA made a 40" widescreen CRT?

George

[Kishore]

The Sony is 40" 4:3 TV (37" widescreen -16:9) 40xbr700/800 series. If you calibrate it it is one of da best in CRT world.

If you want best of both worlds I recommend LCOS Sony 50/60xbr1... however, if I get extra $$ end of this month I will invest it on a plasma (Fujitsu, Pioneer or Panasonic)

Cheers,
Kishore

[jonwb]

I guess you could call me a "early adopter" of HDTV.  Four years ago it was my opinion that the best picture was always from a CRT.  Everything else at the time was a distant second (including high priced plasmas).  I wanted the largest tube I could find and was not interested in a 4:3.  I ended up rolling the dice on a RCA F38310 (38" 16:9).  While many have had reliability issues with this set, mine's been fine and the picture has always been stunning.

While I've longed for something a little bigger, my wife has stood by her requirement that whatever we replace it with must have as good a picture or better.  That's a tall order since, for one, no one has made a bigger 16:9 CRT.  

Over the past year or so we looked at my types of projection TVs and while the picture on many is very good, we simply could not live w/ the limited viewing angle that they all required to look their best.

While LCDs are a no-brainer for anything 32" or smaller they start to get VERY expensive once the size creeps up above that.  And, frankly, the biggest one I've seen in generally availability (the 47" Sharp) didn't look all that great; especially when you consider the high cost ($4,700ish).  I'm sure over time they may indeed replace plasmas, but for larger units... not right now.

It wasn't until recently that I noticed that plasmas had improved significantly over the years.  Early plasma models suffered from a host of technical & performance issues (and they were expensive).  Previously I really believed that it wouldn't be until LCDs were A) made bigger and B) made cheaper that I would be enjoying a non-projection and non-CRT TV.

Fast forward to the here and now... Kishore you are right on the money w/ those brands you mentioned.  I was pleasantly surprised to see how good plasmas have become.  After quite a bit of looking those brands were the best to my eyes and the Panasonics stood alone as the best value.  I recently purchased a 50" Panasonic plasma and I can indeed say that with HD or DVD content the picture is every bit as good as my CRT (and its A LOT bigger )  (warning: that can't necessarily be said of ALL modern plasmas; some aren't so great)

While still expensive, I am actually amazed at what you can get nowadays.  I simply looks stunning and can be viewed from any angle.

[jqp]

Dell 30" Widescreen LCD available soon - US$2,199

native resolution: 2560 x 1600
0.250 mm dot pitch
contrast ratio: 700:1
brightness: 400 cd/m²
25 pounds

1 for the PC one as a TV! (of course you would need a tuner)

[zybar]

I guess you could call me a "early adopter" of HDTV.  Four years ago it was my opinion that the best picture was always from a CRT.  Everything else at the time was a distant second (including high priced plasmas).  I wanted the largest tube I could find and was not interested in a 4:3.  I ended up rolling the dice on a RCA F38310 (38" 16:9).  While many have had reliability issues with this set, mine's been fine and the picture has always been stunning.

While I've longed for something a little bigger, m ...

Slightly off topic...

Have you seen the new Panny pj (AE900)?  

Simply stunning when setup well.

George

[zybar]

Slightly off topic...

Have you seen the new Panny pj (AE900)?  

Simply stunning when setup well.

George

 Yes, it's nice. But there's a reason why the Sanyo PLV-Z4 outsells and outperforms the Panny. See here www.projectorcentral.com

Actually the reviews don't say the Sanyo outperforms the Panny.  Each had its pluses and minuses and both received the same 4 1/2 out of five stars performance rating.

George