Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

DLP vs LCD vs PLASMA

Dave00 said:
The VHS looks MUCH better (as it should, at 4x the resolution).
Click to expand...
Methinks you know not of which you speak.

Even under ideal conditions the maximum available analog bandwidth in a VHS system does not allow you to capture a signal at full NTSC (or PAL) broadcast quality. Hence S-VHS, which gets closer to full resolution, but is still not quite there. You inherently lose information, resolution, color depth, etc... when you go from broadcast to VHS.

(FWIW VHS has 240 analog lines of resolution and S-VHS has 400, while these don't correspond directly to pixels it's not anywhere close to 4x the resolution as you claim).

I really do find that SD (Satellite, DVD, miniDV, iPod/iTMS) content looks significantly better on my LCD HDTV than it ever did on the CRT it replaced. (EDIT: Only when viewed from across the room, up close you see the scaling and compression artifacts). Perhaps the TVs you have seen have used lousy scalers?

B
 
wmmk said:
call me a nut, but a big, high quality CRT can look really nice!
Click to expand...


You know, I just bought an 8 year old 36" Sony Wega XBR flat-screen with
matching stand for $250.00 from the original owner ($2500 new). I am using
this strictly for watching DVDs (using RGB componant inputs from DVD player).

The picture is absolutely stunning. It most definitely blows the doors off of
any HDTV I've seen so far when viewing SDTV (which happens to be a
good majority of broadcasts at the moment). In fact, the girl who sold it
to me said she prefers its picture to the new 42" LCD set she replaced it with.

LOL on all the talk about weight - this beast comes in at 236 lbs, and the stand
is probably 60 lbs. It was an unholy PITA moving it from her place to my
place, but I couldn't be happier with my purchase. Perhaps when HD DVDs
are actually available and affordable, I might consider HDTV. Until then...
 
Samsung

I recently picked up a Samsung 40" LCD 4051 for my parents. My bias aside.

At Circuit City:
The saleman was showing the Samsung hooked up to an Xbox 360 and the picture was incredible. He told me that Samsung worked closely with Micro$oft when developing the "Game Mode" or whatever it's called on the LCD. Well I took his word for it, but I was going to buy that model Samsung any.

The salesman also said that all the Xbox 360's in the store were hooked up to Samsung LCDs. Well I guess that this Microsoft/Samsung collaboration is real.

The next week I saw Xbox 360's hooked up to Samsung LCDs at Best Buy. The week after I was at Walmart and their Xbox 360's were hooked up to Samsung LCDs even though that Walmart didn't even sell Samsung LCDs.

I highly recommend Samsung LCDs
 
Snide said:
LOL on all the talk about weight - this beast comes in at 236 lbs, and the stand
is probably 60 lbs. It was an unholy PITA moving it from her place to my
place, but I couldn't be happier with my purchase.
Click to expand...
Exactly! DLP TVs are not heavy at all compared to other sets, SDTVs, and their rear-projection predecessors. There are CRT tube HDTVs (up to about 37") which weigh as much as those WEGA beasts. That's why the whole "DLP TVs are super heavy and bulky" argument is so absurd.
 
In the size you want, 37-42", LCD all the way. Try and go 1080p if you can afford it. If you are on a budget, Westinghouse is great. I've got their 42" and love it. If you've got cash to spend, Samsung is the way to go. Note that the Westy doesn't have a built NTSC/ATSC tuner (you don't need this with cable or sattelite), but it's got tons of inputs - 1 hdmi, 2 dvi, 1 vga, svidio, 2 component, 1 composite.

I'd only recommend DLP if you want a huge screen over 50"
Most plasma's don't do 1080p (yet) except for some really expensive pioneer 50"ers.

I agree standard def kind of blows on 1080p lcd, but the hdtv channels come in amazing, and for hooking up to an xbox or computer, you are all set.
 
DLP = Yesterdays tech , Plasma = Days are numbered. LCD is KING

I've owned a 50in Plasma , and now have a 32in and 46in LCD (all 3 Samsung models).

Plasma is great except for burn in , I feel like you have to handle these sets with kids gloves , this fact that Plasmas have a very big , long , thin sheet of glass for a screen terrified me. glare is bother some in bright rooms. I have huge windows so this makes things even worse. I took the Plasma back for faulty reasons.

Currently own the Sammy LN-S4695D and LN-R329D. Both are great and have incredible picture quality. LCD in general IMHO are the closest to CRT in terms of durability for everyday use. there really is no sacred set of rules you have follow in order not to screw up the TV like with Plasma and DLP. DLP has a little ticking time bomb called the "back light bulb" that can die tomorrow or in 3yrs ..no thanks guys.


Sammy is the best , Samsung makes the LCD Panels for SONY.
 
Flynnstone said:
I'm leaning towards LCOS or DLP at 1080P.
Click to expand...

I picked up a 60" Sony SXRD for $1799 (muahahahaha) and it's absolutely stunning. The black levels are good enough as makes no odds, and if you have the advanced iris set up the contrast ratio is through the roof. Absolutely beautiful picture.

Some of the nicer Samsung DLPs are the only thing that even come close, but they suffer from a slight screen-door effect, in addition to rainbows if you're susceptible to that sort of thing. On the upside, the blacks on the DLPs are a little inkier and the more defined pixel structure does translate to 'sharper' looking images at close range.
 
jiggie2g said:
there really is no sacred set of rules you have follow in order not to screw up the TV like with Plasma and DLP. DLP has a little ticking time bomb called the "back light bulb" that can die tomorrow or in 3yrs ..no thanks guys.
Click to expand...
The flip side of that argument, of course, is that 3-4 years when the DLP bulb dies, you can replace it. Meanwhile, replacing an LCD backlight in 5 years when it goes, or in 4 years when it's nowhere near as bright as it used to be, is expensive and a toss up as to whether or not it's a DIY task.

I know of no "sacred rules" for DLP TVs, but I'm curious as to what they might be.
 
matticus008 said:
The flip side of that argument, of course, is that 3-4 years when the DLP bulb dies, you can replace it. Meanwhile, replacing an LCD backlight in 5 years when it goes, or in 4 years when it's nowhere near as bright as it used to be, is expensive and a toss up as to whether or not it's a DIY task.

I know of no "sacred rules" for DLP TVs, but I'm curious as to what they might be.
Click to expand...

What proof do u have of LCD back lights dying after 4-5yrs "link please". When most Big Name companies rate their lamps for 60K hrs or atleast 10-12yrs. you like DLP so much buy one if you don't already own one. personally I came close a few time in the last 3yrs and am glad i waited for LCD prices to fall , have no regrets.

I have owned a 15in LCD monitor for the last 5yrs and a 17in for the past 3yrs and both are perfect.

Plasma at less then 50in is a waste as it is not true 720P (1024x768) only , you want 1080P in a plasma prepare to pay $$$$$$$$$$$$.

My 46in LCD is 4in thick and weighs 77lbs w/the stand. Does 1080P with a 6000/1 Contrast ratio and a 178 degree viewing angle. weight does not matter as i wall mount my set. does not burn in at all. LCD may have slight image retention but this is very rare and is not permanent.

A DLP of the same size weighs Less(46lbs) but has the noisy color wheel , rainbow effect , Limited viewing angle , is 11 in thick and is only 720P . cannot wall mount. susceptible to burn in though not as much as plasma. Needs bulbs.

The way prices are falling for LCD , DLP will be a dead or small niche market. 40in 720P LCD Sammys sell for as low as $1349 , 32in $999. Go over 40 and and it gets expensive but this was also the case with 40in LCD's last year. As 52in becomes the next big standard 46 in will hit 40in prices by next fall.

Example my 32in i Purchased on February cost me $1599 and was Sammy Flagship LCD line. Now a model with better specs (LN-S3251D) can be had for $1099. thats the way tech is and demand + production is so high prices are gonna free fall come Christmas.
 
jiggie2g said:
What proof do u have of LCD back lights dying after 4-5yrs "link please". When most Big Name companies rate their lamps for 60K hrs or atleast 10-12yrs.
Click to expand...
Most big name companies project a 60,000 hour lifespan, but that's an "ideal circumstances" projection. A new LCD TV might last close to a decade, but it will dim appreciably in that time. After 4-5 years, the backlight tubes will start to lose white balance and brightness. In a DLP, you can just replace the bulb (which you have to do every 2 years or so anyway--definitely something to consider when buying a DLP that's $900 cheaper than the LCD). Neither technology is perfect, but it's unfair to purchasers to exaggerate claims about "old technology" and "sacred rules" and other crazy notions that simply aren't true.

For the record, I own both an LCD and a DLP HDTV and frankly the LCD wasn't worth the added cost. Performance for dollar is still solidly DLP-biased.

A DLP of the same size weighs Less(46lbs) but has the noisy color wheel , rainbow effect , Limited viewing angle , is 11 in thick and is only 720P . cannot wall mount. susceptible to burn in though not as much as plasma. Needs bulbs.
Click to expand...
DLPs do not suffer from burn-in. In your words, "link please." As for the resolution, there are plenty of 1080p DLP sets. Also, it's not the color wheel that's noisy, it's the fan for clearing out the enclosure. Rainbow effect is the DLP equivalent of LCD image ghosting--a minor problem for a minority of sets--and while most people can see ghosting, most cannot see the rainbow effect. It's a drawback, but it's not like LCD doesn't have its own share of minor problems.

The way prices are falling for LCD , DLP will be a dead or small niche market.
Click to expand...
LCD is impractical at large sizes--it gets too heavy to mount on the wall and is extraordinarily difficult to backlight, not to mention tremendously expensive to service. There are specialty "giant" LCDs, but these are meant for built-in use and not for home consumers. For these purposes, there will undoubtedly be future technologies better suited to the use.
 
I would always by a Plasma because of the contrast ratio, but LCDs are getting better and the LCDs with LED back lighting are gonna be really good.

i think 1080p is gonna be a must soon and i won't upgrade unless it's 1080p, at the moment there arnt many.

Just go for which looks the best to you, everyones eyes are different!
 
I recently purchased a 40" Sony Bravia LCD. I've been very happy. I opted to go with the 720p model vs. the 1080p model (identical sets otherwise), and save $500-600. The reason being there is currently very little 1080p content. No TV stations broadcast 1080p now, and nor will they anytime soon, the bandwidth is simply unreasonable.

Since the High Def DVD market is still up in the air, and with HD-DVD at 720p getting much better reviews than Blu Ray at 1080p, I think right now that as long as you have a set that can fully resolve 720p, you'll be set for some time. As has been said, image quality will actually be higher on lower resolution sets viewing 90% of the content currently available.

Now, if you're really into High Def gaming (XBox 360 or PS3), or if you plan on using your TV extensively as a computer monitor, you may want to consider springing for the higher native resolution.

However, if I could give one word of advice, it would be this: you get what you pay for. Yes, you can get a Westinghouse 1080p monitor for the same price as a smaller, 720p Sony or Sharp TV, but you will notice a difference. Make sure to do your research if you decide to go LCD. Even all Aquos sets are not created equal. There are several tiers within the brand line.

If you decide to go Plasma, I'd highly recommend a Panasonic. Their 42" model was my close close 2nd choice behind my Bravia, and all in all may have had better image quality. However, reliability, versatility and glare are what eventually made my decision for me. DLP's are great in a home theater type set up, but usually not hugely appropriate for standard everyday bright living rooms.

Just my 2 cents. I'll do my best to answer any questions.
 
The electronics companies love pushing new (higher profit margin) technologies on the masses with inflated prices and high-tech sounding names and the problem is that too many think newer automatically equals better. It doesn't.

What is the most important feature of a TV set? Picture quality. What technology today has the best picture for HDTVs for consumers? Plasma? Nope. LCD? Nope. DLP? Nope. It's good ol' direct-view CRT. Yes, they weigh a ton and only go up to around 34" but WHAT A PICTURE!!!!

If you have a room that can accommodate it, and you want the best picture available today, then a used Sony KD-34XBR960 (not 970) at 34" widescreen is your best bet (http://www.tvsnob.com/archives/003006.php). If you really want the best picture but simply must have the flatter screen, wait until the end of next year for this:

http://news.com.com/2100-1041-6122031.html?tag=yt

The new SED TVs will make the current HDTV flat panel TVs look like crap.

Nonetheless, it is only TV and doesn't really matter in the scheme of things, so get what you want and when you want and be happy.
 
spinne1 said:
The electronics companies love pushing new (higher profit margin) technologies on the masses with inflated prices and high-tech sounding names and the problem is that too many think newer automatically equals better. It doesn't.
Click to expand...

Funny you should make this statement and then point us to an article about SED displays, which are only better because the manufacturer says they are and will sell "at a premium" to LCDs.
 
IJ Reilly said:
Funny you should make this statement and then point us to an article about SED displays, which are only better because the manufacturer says they are and will sell "at a premium" to LCDs.
Click to expand...
Note that SED is only partly new technology. The idea is essentially to use well established CRT phosphor technology with a new way of generating the electron beam(s). The backlighting issues of current LCDs would go away since the phosphors emit light as in a CRT.

SED is expected to sell at a premium to LCD until volumes go up, but the mfg. costs should actually be lower than current LCDs and the performance (contrast ratio/brightness) should be very similar to CRTs.

B
 
balamw said:
Note that SED is only partly new technology. The idea is essentially to use well established CRT phosphor technology with a new way of generating the electron beam(s). The backlighting issues of current LCDs would go away since the phosphors emit light as in a CRT.

SED is expected to sell at a premium to LCD until volumes go up, but the mfg. costs should actually be lower than current LCDs and the performance (contrast ratio/brightness) should be very similar to CRTs.

B
Click to expand...

So they say. This is the first I've heard about SED but if it uses phosphors I have to assume it will inherit some of the weaknesses of CRT technology, particularly, the phosphors will wear out over time and the image lose brightness and contrast accordingly. All of these technologies get cheaper/better so that's not much of a distinction for SED. Obviously LCDs will also continue to get cheaper and better.

I just thought it was amusing to have this reference come along with the advice not to chase the latest, greatest, expensive technologies. Clearly SED is just that.
 
SED looks very promising, but it's still vaporware. According to the article, not available till 2007 and then only in Japan. So don't hold your breath, buy that LCD today!
 
spinne1 said:
The electronics companies love pushing new (higher profit margin) technologies on the masses with inflated prices and high-tech sounding names and the problem is that too many think newer automatically equals better. It doesn't.

What is the most important feature of a TV set? Picture quality. What technology today has the best picture for HDTVs for consumers? Plasma? Nope. LCD? Nope. DLP? Nope. It's good ol' direct-view CRT. Yes, they weigh a ton and only go up to around 34" but WHAT A PICTURE!!!!

If you have a room that can accommodate it, and you want the best picture available today, then a used Sony KD-34XBR960 (not 970) at 34" widescreen is your best bet (http://www.tvsnob.com/archives/003006.php). If you really want the best picture but simply must have the flatter screen, wait until the end of next year for this:

http://news.com.com/2100-1041-6122031.html?tag=yt

The new SED TVs will make the current HDTV flat panel TVs look like crap.

Nonetheless, it is only TV and doesn't really matter in the scheme of things, so get what you want and when you want and be happy.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. There was a 32" flat CRT Sony Wega a while back that was absolutely stunning in picture quality, sharpness, and contrast. I'm sure it weighed upwards of 180 lbs., but that's not a problem unless you want to hang it on the wall.

And what "dimming of the phosphors" are you talking about? My family has had a 27" Sony CRT for nearly 18 years, and it's as good as the day it was bought. My grandparents have a 30 year-old TV that, while it's only so-so for cable content, plays DVD's decently well. The color's not as saturated as I might like, but for the lowest cost in a TV technology, anything more than 10-15 years should be fine.

SED sounds interesting.
 
GeeYouEye said:
I agree completely. There was a 32" flat CRT Sony Wega a while back that was absolutely stunning in picture quality, sharpness, and contrast. I'm sure it weighed upwards of 180 lbs., but that's not a problem unless you want to hang it on the wall.

And what "dimming of the phosphors" are you talking about? My family has had a 27" Sony CRT for nearly 18 years, and it's as good as the day it was bought. My grandparents have a 30 year-old TV that, while it's only so-so for cable content, plays DVD's decently well. The color's not as saturated as I might like, but for the lowest cost in a TV technology, anything more than 10-15 years should be fine.

SED sounds interesting.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but a TV that weighs more than I do is a problem even if I don't want to hang it on the wall. ;)

Phosphors wear out -- it's in the nature of the technology. It happens gradually enough that most people won't notice if they watch the same TV every night for years. I've got a 27" Sony CRT which is less than ten years old, and I have to adjust the brightness and contrast regularly because the picture is not as good as the day we bought it. CRTs don't last forever -- they get dimmer with age, and this is why.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back