Plasma really worth it? (1 Viewer)

[Brent M]

Obviously another uninformed person. Go spend some time over at AVS Forum and learn a little about the different display technologies before you dismiss one so easily without reason.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

Obviously.

Don't want to get your panties in a bunch, but I certainly don't hold plasmas in very high regard, nor do I find them of reasonable value.

Plasma's have their usability benefits, but in terms of PQ, they are lackluster.

I'm sorry if being an anal videophile makes me "uninformed"

FP is my starting point, and CRT is my reference. Perhaps it would do you well to explore some of the other forums at AVS as well...

:frowning:

 

[ChrisWiggles]

However, I will admit to being uninformed enough that I didn't realize this was a very old thread. I was going to type out a long explanation, and realized that much of what I was going to say I've already explained on the first page...

:b

 

[Steven.W.T]

I dont think plasma is worth the price. But if you can afford it. Go ahead. Their thin, and their sexy. For the same price you can get a high end RPTV that is bigger with a picture that has the same or better pq then a plasma. They are bigger but in most cases, you'll find the room for them. They are shrinking too, the new 2004 Hitachi models shrank like 5", the CRT RPTV.

 

[Brent M]

Chris,

I've explored ALL of the forums at AVS and I've also looked at every type of display technology on the market. Apparently you aren't as informed as you say because if you were you'd know that a good plasma display(like Fujitsu, Panasonic, etc) is anything but "lackluster". I'll put a top-notch plasma up against CRT, DLP and LCD any day of the week and we'll see what looks the best.

 

[DaveGTP]

Holy old thread !

In my opinion, I didn't like the look of plasma TV's playing back HDTV, mostly because it had a somewhat washed out look to the picture

That's because the brightness, contrast, and sharpness are all cranked up about 200% higher than they should be at the store. Take the remote, crank them down to much lower levels, and look again.

When I was display shopping, I noticed the Panny plasma at Circuit City looked like crap compared to the Samsung DLP RPTV next to it. A lot of dithering, it looked washed out, digital, and icky. A quick adjustment to the settings and it looked much much better.

 

[Jack Gilvey]

I always thought plasmas were kinda neat hanging on the wall, but after experiencing front-projection I wouldn't bother with one. A little 50" model would be pretty cute for the bedroom, though. Bright,if you want a TV for the deck.

 

[John F. Palacio]

Jack Gilvey says:

I always thought plasmas were kinda neat hanging on the wall, but after experiencing front-projection I wouldn't bother with one. A little 50" model would be pretty cute for the bedroom, though. Bright,if you want a TV for the deck.

FP's are great, but...
Like everything else they have pro's and con's.
Unlike plasma's or direct view CRT and, to a lesser extent RP's, they cannot be viewed in a brightly lit room (or a deck during daylight hours). Plasma's and direct view CRT's are the best choices if one needs to view in a lit room. RP's are second.

Interesting you consider a 50" screen little.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

Brent: I've explored plasmas, and as a very demanding videophile, I have my own set of preferences and uses for a display. The "reference" display will vary depending on the uses and demands of any particular person.

For me, I'll tell you my preferences. First, a large screen is paramount, and a plasma just doesn't cut it in the least. 80 inches wide (142 inches diagonally) is about my minimum screen size desirable. There are no plasmas that come close. As a fairly demanding video enthusiast, I have no qualms about an all-black dedicated viewing room, and as such there is absolutely no reason for me to consider a plasma, and furthermore, they are quite expensive for what you are getting.

There are no displays that will equal what a 9inch CRT will throw overall, that I have ever seen, and the closest that I've seen just two days ago was the sony Qualia, which still isn't "better" for my preferences, but for some would be. There is no plasma that can compare with either of these options, IMO. It's not even a fair fight. Both of these options outclass all DLP projectors that I've seen, at any price point.

For you, plasma may be the best option. But for someone who has the capabilities for front projection, there just is no comparison, IMO. I am no holds-barred when it comes to criticizing particular displays, and I mean nothing insulting or negative to you by it, but when I say that plasma is not a reference display technology, I mean it, and I don't think that it is unfounded in the least.

For many uses and many people it is the "perfect" display for the task. For me, who demands a large screen and the highest video quality possible, CRT FP is still the biggest bargain, and highest quality picture out there. The digitals projectors are getting much closer, but are still quite far away in quality, except for perhaps the Qualia.

 

[Brent M]

Chris,

In this day and age, CRT FP is the dinosaur of the video world. While I realize it might be difficult to beat for overall video performance, it's a dying breed without question and I don't think you'll find too many people who will dispute that claim. In addition to being an outdated technology, they're outrageously expensive and require constant maintenance. Since I'm not at all interested in investing the time and money necessary for a CRT FP(not to mention that I don't have anywhere near enough room for a 146" screen), I took a serious look at DLP front projectors. I've seen Sharp, Marantz, Yamaha and several other "upper level" brands and I must say I was very unimpressed with the picture quality(and these were high-end setups in dedicated HT rooms). Size may be of paramount importance to you, but overall PQ is what matters most to me and I've yet to see a DLP front projector that throws and image as good as my plasma. So, while plasma may not be the right choice for you, it is completely perfect for me and I welcome you over to the Flat Panel Display forum over at AVS to learn a little more from the many happy owners there. Either you just haven't seen a good plasma yet or you're not as informed about them as you are about other display technologies like CRTs.

 

[Jack Gilvey]

Interesting you consider a 50" screen little.

Yup. Of course, if PQ isn't there, size means little. Very happy in that area with my InFocus 4805. Wouldn't trade it for any flat TV I've ever seen.

 

[DaveGTP]

but when I say that plasma is not a reference display technology, I mean it, and I don't think that it is unfounded in the least.

What does the screen size have to do with the quality? You say that plasmas are not a reference technology, but what you should be really saying is "Plasmas are too small". There is quality as smaller screen sizes too.


People who want to do FP are a minority, and a FP doesn't work in all situations. Do you want a FP setup in your kitchen? In a room full of windows and big ol french doors which overlook a beautiful view of a lake or something? Or in a room with skylights?

Perhaps you have the size, space and darkness needed for FP, but that doesn't make the other technologies "not reference".

 

[Jack Gilvey]

No, definitely wouldn't want a FP in the kitchen for those cook-alongs. If you're enough of an enthusiast to provide the right conditions, however, FP is the reference for PQ. And, as I see it, if you're looking to replicate the theater experience at home, then image size is indeed a "quality".

 

[ChrisWiggles]

Where did kitchens come into play?

this is the home theater forum, and while there are many uses and situations where FP is not adequate, w/regards to home theaters, a proper dedicated room is more than adequate for a front-projection setup.

For me, ultimate picture quality is important, and I really don't care about having the "newest" flashiest technology, be that DLP, or plasma, or lasers or whatever. It doesn't bother me to have a monster display that is of a "dying breed" (which I am not contesting). I want the best picture quality, and the most film-like presentation with a proper viewing angle, and the only projectors that hit that that I have seen are CRT, and the Qualia. You're right Brent, I don't like the DLPs much either where they stand at this point. The best I've seen is probably a single-chip HD2+, which I would say is equivalent to the 3x price 3-chippers. If you want to criticize me for my lack of knowledge, I'd also like to point out that CRT FP is probably the single biggest bargain out there currently, if you are one who demands the best PQ, damn the work it takes to get that. There just isn't any reason I can see that I would put a plasma in a dedicated theater, since the good ones are pushing 5 figures, and you can buy a mint 8 or even 9inch CRT for that, and there is just no contest there, IMO.

 

[John_F]

CRT FP...

 

[ChrisWiggles]

*sigh*

 

[Sami Kallio]

If you want the best PQ then it is quite simple: FP CRT. Plasma is ok in situations where high WAF is needed but you will lose quite a lot in PQ.

 

[John_F]

*sigh*

I agree.

 

[Jack Gilvey]

Ahh, the predictable descent into idiocy...

 

[DaveGTP]

*sigh*

Not everyone wants a dedicated HT, nor does everybody have room for a FP setup, nor does everyone want the excessive light control that a HT takes.

To the original poster, a plasma is a great purchase for its pros and cons. There is no one "best" display - only which one fits your needs.

If the plasma pros

viewing angle
black level better than any other non-CRT display (on the good plasmas)
size (42" - 50" being not too highly priced)
works well in lighted conditions



and cons

could burn in if abused - unlikely problem if you do some reading
expensive per screen inch



fits your needs, then do it!