Which TV would you choose ?

from_atozinc

I know yee are are probably sick to the back teeth of seeing questions like this, but this particular decision is doing my head in. One minute I'm plasma, the next minute LED and vice versa, I just can't make my mind up.


If the price was roughly around the same, what would be your choice of TV

1. 50 inch Plasma, 1080 P, 600HZ

2. 50 inch LED, 1080 P, 100 HZ


mainly for sport and general television viewing. I have upc HD but only a small percentage of the channels are HD so I would probably spend most of my time watching standard definition channels.

Im looking for the one with the clearest picture quality.

from_atozinc

Anyone

dharn

Number 2

from_atozinc

dharn wrote: »

Number 2

But is the LED good for watching sport though ?

Passenger

Do you have any more specs for the TV's?

from_atozinc

Passenger wrote: »

Do you have any more specs for the TV's?

1. Plasma = http://www.richersounds.com/product/tv---all/lg/50pn650t/lg-50pn650t

2. LED =
http://www.soundandvision.co.uk/tv/led/samsung-ue46f5000akx-ue46f5000-46-inch-full-hd-freeview-hd-cheap-price

The led is only a 46 inch.

Cuddlesworth

LED. Better picture, brighter picture and uses a fraction of the energy.

from_atozinc

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

LED. Better picture, brighter picture and uses a fraction of the energy.

Thanks, but what about the refresh rate for watching Sport on standrad definition channels

Which TV is better for watching standard definition channels ?

Cuddlesworth

from_atozinc wrote: »

Thanks, but what about the refresh rate for watching Sport on standrad definition channels

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056932072

from_atozinc wrote: »

Which TV is better for watching standard definition channels ?

Doesn't matter. Both are 1080p and neither of them upscale.

Passenger

Both are good spec TV's, OP. In terms of picture quality, they'd both be of a high standard and I doubt you would tell the difference if you sat and watched them both side by side. I would tend to lean more toward the LED as it is the newer technology and many say that Plasma is on the decline. The energy saving would be far superior on the LED too but it's your money. Maybe find those model TV's in your nearest electronics store and see if they have them on display as that would surly sway you to one over the other.

from_atozinc

Passenger wrote: »

Both are good spec TV's, OP. In terms of picture quality, they'd both be of a high standard and I doubt you would tell the difference if you sat and watched them both side by side. I would tend to lean more toward the LED as it is the newer technology and many say that Plasma is on the decline. The energy saving would be far superior on the LED too but it's your money. Maybe find those model TV's in your nearest electronics store and see if they have them on display as that would surly sway you to one over the other.

Thanks for reply passenger

This decision is seriously wrecking my head ( and herselfs head ) ; )

I decide on plasma , then led, then plasma , then led.

Which TV would have the best picture / less blur ?

Would the LED be really that bad for watching sport ?

Peter Rhea

from_atozinc wrote: »

Would the LED be really that bad for watching sport ?

Seems like a solid vote for LED in this thread, where are you getting this 'bad for watching sport' thing?

from_atozinc

Peter Rhea wrote: »

Seems like a solid vote for LED in this thread, where are you getting this 'bad for watching sport' thing?

mmmmm, but its hardly definitive, at the end of the day, its only 2/3 people really that have said LED.

Now I know no one has said plasma either......but it's not like 20 people said LED.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1396005/240hz-led-tvs-almost-as-good-as-plasma-now


http://www.avsforum.com/t/1367802/plasma-vs-led-for-sports-viewing

Peter Rhea

from_atozinc wrote: »

mmmmm, but its hardly definitive, at the end of the day, its only 2/3 people really that have said LED.

Now I know no one has said plasma either......but it's not like 20 people said LED.

True, but if you're waiting for 20 different people to reply to this thread, you'll never buy a tv.

Had no hesitation going for LED myself, though didn't give the 'finer points' as much consideration as you seem to be doing. Only way you'll be 100% sure, is to see both properly set up & working in the room you intend to view in.

from_atozinc

Peter Rhea wrote: »

True, but if you're waiting for 20 different people to reply to this thread, you'll never buy a tv.

Had no hesitation going for LED myself, though didn't give the 'finer points' as much consideration as you seem to be doing. Only way you'll be 100% sure, is to see both properly set up & working in the room you intend to view in.

How do you find the LED for watching sport ?

Which model did you go for if you dont mind me asking ?

Peter Rhea

Just an entry-level Samsung UE40EH5000. Haven't noticed anything objectionable while watching, sport or other material. Any attempt to portray moving pictures will be challenged by fast-moving action, as will our eyes, & I'm not so sure I believe some of those who claim to be able to see advantages with one display technology v. another.

One thing I'll say, & it's especially true for sport, once you view in HD, you won't want to go back to standard def., & moreso with the less-than-the-best-possible resolution used on a lot of SD channels, on terrestrial & satellite broadcasts anyway.

b318isp

I've yet to see an LED picture to better my Pioneer Plasma, so I would be biased in that direction. That said, I'm not sure how the cheaper plasma's are these days - and I'd always recommend that you get to demo any TV you have in mind - especially on SD sport, the one that really separates the men from the boys. The main drawback for me of Plasma is burn in - stick to LED if you plan to play games a lot.

from_atozinc

b318isp wrote: »

I've yet to see an LED picture to better my Pioneer Plasma, so I would be biased in that direction. That said, I'm not sure how the cheaper plasma's are these days - and I'd always recommend that you get to demo any TV you have in mind - especially on SD sport, the one that really separates the men from the boys. The main drawback for me of Plasma is burn in - stick to LED if you plan to play games a lot.

Thanks for reply.
I dont do any gaming at all

from_atozinc

b318isp wrote: »

I've yet to see an LED picture to better my Pioneer Plasma, so I would be biased in that direction. That said, I'm not sure how the cheaper plasma's are these days - and I'd always recommend that you get to demo any TV you have in mind - especially on SD sport, the one that really separates the men from the boys. The main drawback for me of Plasma is burn in - stick to LED if you plan to play games a lot.

So just a query, these days, is 730 Euro cheap for a 50 Inch LG plasma ?

Cuddlesworth

Your sport comes in a 25 frames per second. You need 50 hertz to display that at a 1 to 1 ratio(progressive). Most TV's now days are 100 hertz, so your TV spends half its time waiting on a signal.

Early/cheap LCD's suffered from ghosting due to **** panels, "fake" hertz and bad color to color changes.

I haven't seen a TV that does it now in nearly four years. And the few that might have been questionable, the issue was post processing for normal non motion TV. Easily turned off by setting the screen to "Game".

b318isp

from_atozinc wrote: »

So just a query, these days, is 730 Euro cheap for a 50 Inch LG plasma ?

I wouldn't like to say how much mine cost!

Personally, if you are serious about picture quality this is about the minimum I would expect to pay.

NewBeefFarmer

ok, i had to get in here. .
i was where you are now in 2009. .. i kinda knew what i wanted in a tv. . . good quality, good image.. . . . im a fussy guy, and used to hate them screens in pubs. . . hate the blocky drag on an LCD etc. . . .

then i was told, + i say the same thing to anyone looking at plasma or led/lcd today. . .if you see no difference in the 2, then by the cheapest.. . . but remember, do not go by the SHOP DISPLAY, why. . cuase its all hooked up to SLY HD. . or run a blue ray. . .. + the tv is on Dynamic shop display mode. . . . basically. . running the car at max rpm.. .
if u done this when u got the tv home, it would burn out in 2 yrs. .

anyway

basically . . .under 32 inch, stay lcd. . it can handle it. . anything over 32 to maintain perfect image go plasma. .

on top TV sites and enthusiasts alike Plasma wins hands down on quality everytime. . . and more so on panasonic pioneer etc. . . the enriched colour/. . especially black is almost hard to come out on an lcd/led

ever see black on an lcd?. . bet its friggen grey if u look again. .

ive yet to see a good lg or samsung plasma. . .i bought my 46 inch pany in 2009 for €1,300

and another thing. . . if ur like me, and dont stupidly pay sly an extra sub for HD. . the best tv for watching std tv is a plasma... zero drag. . i cant bare to watch my bro in laws tv . . . samsung led. . so blocky . .

anyway. . why have i come on here. . . well. .. buying a second tv now. . . looking at around a 42 inch for the bedroom. . . was wondering. . just go led/lcd. . .. . . as its for the bedroom. . im only looking to spend 400max5 on a tv. . .can be lcd or led or plasma. ..

currently looking at lg plasma. . on harveys for 399.


ps.. . . ghosting? image burn?. .. come on lads its not 1990. . . i pause sky for 30 mins . . and nothing. . .

panasonic. . . 48 inch plasma. . . . with pany sound bar. . . . best system ever. . . for the everyday room.

do not by a 46/48/50 plasma for anything under 1200/1600 . ..

running cost. . .well, u pick either the 2ltr TDI or the 1.4 LX. TD .

my view on it all anyway. .

now, lcd or plasma for the bedroom. . :pac:

Peter Rhea

Dynamic picture setting is only for brightly lit viewing areas, like a shop: it's not some magic optimum setting & nobody in their right mind would use it for home viewing.

Blockiness on substandard broadcast material is not a failing of the display & will be greatly increased in visibility if overly bright & sharp 'dynamic' settings are used.

from_atozinc

New beef that was some post

Although in sayin that your decision was 4 years ago and tvs have improved alot since that........well you would think anyways

I'm thinking of a 50 inch plasma full HD for 730 Euro !!

For a 50 inch TV, how far should one be sitting from the TV for optimum viewing ?

NewBeefFarmer

3 meters

NewBeefFarmer

from_atozinc wrote: »

New beef that was some post

Although in sayin that your decision was 4 years ago and tvs have improved alot since that........well you would think anyways

I'm thinking of a 50 inch plasma full HD for 730 Euro !!

For a 50 inch TV, how far should one be sitting from the TV for optimum viewing ?

True, , but why do plasma TVs appear to be the upper MKT selection. . .
If it blew in the morn, I'd have to ask myself would I chance LCD/led . . . to answer, I don't think I would. .

PS try and stretch for a pany. . won't be disappointed. Even drop down an inch or 2

belcampprisoner

you can buy both cheaper elsewhere Samsung will last longer than lg


pixmania ie has it foor 699 euros I am sure other places are cheaper

prices are at the highest I would wait a few months to buy


http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/category/reviews

from_atozinc

NewBeefFarmer wrote: »

True, , but why do plasma TVs appear to be the upper MKT selection. . .
If it blew in the morn, I'd have to ask myself would I chance LCD/led . . . to answer, I don't think I would. .

PS try and stretch for a pany. . won't be disappointed. Even drop down an inch or 2

I have a budget and don't want to go above it.

So you would not recommend a 50 inch LG plasma anyways ?

dharn

I believe panasonic make the best tv s on the market at present, many of them have 5 year warranty

Peter Rhea

People comparing tvs based on what they've seen in a pub, a shop, or someone else's house (unless you set up this someone else's tv for them) is pointless.

Stoner

from_atozinc wrote: »

I know yee are are probably sick to the back teeth of seeing questions like this, but this particular decision is doing my head in. One minute I'm plasma, the next minute LED and vice versa, I just can't make my mind up.


If the price was roughly around the same, what would be your choice of TV

1. 50 inch Plasma, 1080 P, 600HZ

2. 50 inch LED, 1080 P, 100 HZ


mainly for sport and general television viewing. I have upc HD but only a small percentage of the channels are HD so I would probably spend most of my time watching standard definition channels.

Im looking for the one with the clearest picture quality.

OP i was faced with this about 18 months ago, I bought the 50" plasma, I went to belfast and looked at the units there was an LG LED 100 Hz vs the 50 inch Plasma, 1080 P, 600HZ sub field, they showed me a HD video of pyramids etc and I thought there was a tiny stutter on the 100Hz that was not noticeable on the plasma.

soon after I bought a 47" LG for my brother in law. There is little difference in the picture quality (this is a 200Hz LED unit) the 47" LED has passive 3D tech not active like mine so I got it as he has a bundle of kids and the glasses are cheap compared to the 70 pound a pair active ones like mine. I actually prefer the 3d on his TV.

Power consumption was not an issue really only units was 108 Watt compare to 130 Watts and it was a bigger screen, the old plasma I had was like an electric heater but the gap has closed up considerably with respect to power consumption with LED winning but not by the distances of old. It's not a huge factor anynmore

I'm told the 600hz subfiled it closer to a 400 Hz LED i dont know if this is the case , but i 100% saw a noticeable improvement in the smoothness of the picture on the 600Hz plasma vs the 100 and 150 Hz LED TVs, have not noticed it on he 200Hz one thoiugh

Cuddlesworth

You can't tell the difference between a 600 hertz plasma and a 100 hertz LED unless you have input source playing a solid 51+fps progressive.

The very recent trend of 48fps movies in the cinema might put things into perspective as to how far along that tech path the movie industry has progressed.

Stoner

to follow that up, this particular video that they had in the store was the only media that i noticed a difference on., I dont know what its fps was but there was a noticeable difference, they was no difference on the HD satellite signal

from_atozinc

Stoner wrote: »

OP i was faced with this about 18 months ago, I bought the 50" plasma, I went to belfast and looked at the units there was an LG LED 100 Hz vs the 50 inch Plasma, 1080 P, 600HZ sub field, they showed me a HD video of pyramids etc and I thought there was a tiny stutter on the 100Hz that was not noticeable on the plasma.

soon after I bought a 47" LG for my brother in law. There is little difference in the picture quality (this is a 200Hz LED unit) the 47" LED has passive 3D tech not active like mine so I got it as he has a bundle of kids and the glasses are cheap compared to the 70 pound a pair active ones like mine. I actually prefer the 3d on his TV.

Power consumption was not an issue really only units was 108 Watt compare to 130 Watts and it was a bigger screen, the old plasma I had was like an electric heater but the gap has closed up considerably with respect to power consumption with LED winning but not by the distances of old. It's not a huge factor anynmore

I'm told the 600hz subfiled it closer to a 400 Hz LED i dont know if this is the case , but i 100% saw a noticeable improvement in the smoothness of the picture on the 600Hz plasma vs the 100 and 150 Hz LED TVs, have not noticed it on he 200Hz one thoiugh

mmmm, thanks Stoner.
What do you think would be the best TV for basic standard definition viewing ? i.e. Which are better at down scaling ?

dharn

from_atozinc wrote: »

mmmm, thanks Stoner.
What do you think would be the best TV for basic standard definition viewing ? i.e. Which are better at down scaling ?

Atozinc, I think you are over analyzing the situation just do it as the ad says.. buy a telly that looks good to your eye, broadcast tv is never as good as demo bluray in shop. Even hd much of it is upscaled, otherwise you will be an old man still mulling over the decision !

Stoner

from_atozinc wrote: »

mmmm, thanks Stoner.
What do you think would be the best TV for basic standard definition viewing ? i.e. Which are better at down scaling ?

I have not tired many SD signals sorry, I've seen HD free sat on both and its good. Everything I watch is either upscaled via my AV amp or is HD