To Plasma or not to plasma... Questions.

[yamdsp-a1]

HI,

I am seriously considering taking the plunge and buying a 42 inch Plasma display.

I am going to go for one of the "cheap" ones - Samsung, Gateway, Sampo or something like that. I like Samsung products so I am leaning towards that brand name.

What are the important things to consider when purchasing one of these beasts?

Is the pixel rate important? And is higher better? I think the Samsung is 800 by 480 so is more better on this? Should I be looking for higher pixel rates?

What about Brightness, Candle strength etc?

What should I be looking at besides the $$$ if I seriously want to buy one of these?

Anyone in the Manhattan New Jersey area recommend a place to purchase? Probably going to be buying while I am in NYC.

Any and all input appreciated.

Yam

[topspeed]

I've heard there are serious problems with plasma's as to their longevity. There are others here such as Woodman who will be able to qualify that far better than I. The rumor is that they will fry in about 5 years, tops. Before I unload a bunch of dead presidents on anything just because it is hip and cool, I'd consider how long it will last. Yes, plasma's native pixel rate is better than most crt and lcd sets. However, dlp's are right there and don't have the burn-in problem of plasmas. Also, the new LCOS sets are supposed to offer the best of all worlds. Right now, it seems that the best picture for the money is still good 'ol crt. They may not hang on the wall but their black level is still the best and they don't suffer the bleeding problems of first gen dlp's.

BTW, as far as getting a "cheap" plasma, buyer beware: you get what you pay for. There a good chance the picture will unlikely be better than a crt that you could have purchased for half the price. Just a thought...

Good luck

[yamdsp-a1]

I knew there was an issue with the longevity of the displays, although I didn't realize there life span was as low as 5 years. It is a lot of $$ to drop on something that only last five years...

I am hoping Woodman will drop in and give me his opinion on these things.

I am still pretty much set on getting one, unless I can find something about the same size, with about the same foot print. Most CRT's of the size I want, 42" widescreen, are just too big for the space I have, projection isn't an option because I can't get the room dark enough, and I don't know much about the other options available as the selection is very limited where I live.

I am hoping to get some research in before I go on my buying trip in March, so thanks very much for your input.

Yam

[Jetsons]

Plasma life of a quality screen is stated by manufacurers in the range of 50K-60K hours. At that point, the brightness of the screen reportedly decreases by 50% and you can adjust the contrast settings to compensate. Burn in is the main issue with these screens so one has to be careful in this regard.

As to models, I would suggest looking at something along the lines of the Panny commercial models (same as consumer w/o speakers and tuner) which have a far better picture than the models you mentioned. Price of the commercial 42" Panny is easily in line with any of the above mentioned panels.

Check out avsforum.com, plasma display forum and read for a couple of weeks. There is a wealth of info there on this subject.

Jet

[woodman]

Yam:
I highly urge you to unconsider buying a plasma display ... they're just not worth the pricetag. Especially, the cheaper ones that you say you're considering. About the only thing they have going for them is the "coolness" ... the "wow factor". To pay around $3K for such a limited payoff is not very cool IMO.

You say that you have space limitations that would eliminate an RPTV from contention. Give me the specifics please.

You also say that you cannot consider front projection because you cannot control the ambient light in the room. Again, give me the specifics for that "problem".

Let me try to help you avoid a costly buying "mistake" ... please. I flatly don't accept Jetson's statement that the mfgs. of plasma displays claim a life expectancy of 50,000 to 60,000 hours of operation before the brightness level drops to 50%. I think maybe he mistakenly saw one too many zeros. I would expect 5,000 to 6,000 hours would likely be more accurate, but they haven't been around long enough for anyone to know for sure.

[jeskibuff]

I would expect 5,000 to 6,000 hours would likely be more accurate, but they haven't been around long enough for anyone to know for sure.

And just where are you pulling these numbers from, Woodman? Do a quick websearch for "plasma lifespan" and you'll see a consistent 20K to 30,000 hours before that 50% mark is reached. Well, 30,000 hours works out to be 3.4 years if on 24 hours per day. Plasmas certainly have been around long enough for manufacturers to make those tests. As one site says, if you watch about 4 hours per day, you'll get about 21 years of life out of it before it hits that point where you have to adjust for the brightness factor.

[Widowmaker]

Like others here, I would highly recommend that you do not get a plasma, for many of the reasons listed previously. Do you really want to pay for a TV that might just last 10 years? I don't know about you, but if I pay $10k+ for a TV, I would want to it last FOREVER.

Also, next time you go to look at them, run your fingers along the top where the heat vents are. You will notice right away how hot they run, hotter than any other display out there. Imagine the burn-in possibilities...

Lastly, a 50 inch plasma may sound nice on paper but once you hang that sucker on the wall and sit 8-12 feet away from it, you'll be surprised how small it looks, especially considering all the money you spent on it.

[yamdsp-a1]

All valid points, however, I wasn't looking to spend $10K or anywhere near that amount. Hopefully under $3K

I am doing more and more research on the subject. I know a guy who purchased a Panasonic RPTV LCD which he claims is 16" at its widest point for a 50" screen. I am going to look at it this weekend. It is about the same price as the Plasma, weighs about 80lbs and can fit on top of my stereo cabinet - this how he has it set up. That covers a lot of my bases, so it could be a real contender. I am curious how it is effected by ambient light and if there is any glare on the screen.

The plasma is still the front runner though. I don't mind if it runs hot, and it seems to me, the technology has evolved to compensate for the earlier burn in problems, and the black levels are much improved over earlier iterations. I don't really want to hang it on the wall but it would look pretty good in my living room. As will the RPTV.

The search and saga continues....

Yam

[topspeed]

All valid points, however, I wasn't looking to spend $10K or anywhere near that amount. Hopefully under $3K

I am doing more and more research on the subject. I know a guy who purchased a Panasonic RPTV LCD which he claims is 16" at its widest point for a 50" screen. I am going to look at it this weekend. It is about the same price as the Plasma, weighs about 80lbs and can fit on top of my stereo cabinet - this how he has it set up. That covers a lot of my bases, so it could be a real contender. I am curious how it is effected by ambient light and if there is any glare on the screen.

The plasma is still the front runner though. I don't mind if it runs hot, and it seems to me, the technology has evolved to compensate for the earlier burn in problems, and the black levels are much improved over earlier iterations. I don't really want to hang it on the wall but it would look pretty good in my living room. As will the RPTV.

The search and saga continues....

Yam

Dunno about the Panny but I watched the Rose Bowl on a friend's new Sony 40" lcd (via Dish Network) and it wasn't all it was cracked up to be. When there was a lot of things happening on screen, there was a visible blurring or "ghosting" of the images. They simply weren't very defined. Also, the black level pretty well sucks. This is an inherent problem with lcd's from what I understand (which is very little) and it makes a difference in the contrast levels present. The colors are beautiful and the brightness seem fine but that wierd imaging during the game pretty much nailed the lid shut on LCD's for me. Honestly, it sounds like you're pretty well sold on plasma's anyway.

Good luck

[jgierich]

Speaking as one who has a new model 50" Panasonic, I have absolutely nothing negative to report about it. The Picture blows me and everyone else that sees it away. I did about three months of research before I made my purchase and almost without exception, the Panasonic stood head and shoulders above any other brand. I spent the extra bucks and have it mounted on a Bello Plasma stand and it is an awesome display. Prices have dropped significantly. My total purchase, with the stand was under 7k. I dealt with Visual Apex on the purchase and they were outstanding. I would highly recomend the Pani

[RayBan]

Well there is no denying that a CRT will give a better black level...
Iam an owner of a plasma (under 3k) and I found that by taking the time to adjust the set with something coperable to the Digital video esentials test disk, Iam able to get a pretty good image. Sure it will never equal a CRT but if you buy it knowing that it's not a big deal. I also can tell you that the better quality cable youuse the better the picture as well Component being a good picture
As far as life of the TV? Considering how incredible the strides in technology are and the track record of EVERY peice of equipment I ever owned, I'm not going to stress over this TV lasting 10 years. IMAGINE what we will be talking about in 10 years! I'm sure it will get me happily thru 5+ years