Originally Posted By: OtisBlkR1
Originally Posted By: Volvohead
Originally Posted By: Unearthed
Unless price is a limiting factor, I have no idea why anyone would purchase a plasma set in March of 2012.
Because the optimum viewing angle on LCD, while improved, still stinks compared to plasma. A plasma delivers a great picture from everywhere in the room. And the best plasma panels still have better color fidelity than the best LCDs. Overdriven store displays are not a good judge.
For the OP: how many are viewing and from where are factors to consider. If it's a wide viewing range, you will do better with a plasma. Go just outside the sweet spot, and LCD's color and contrast levels fall off the table. That sweet spot is BOTH vertical and horizontal, so a tilting mount is much more essential with an LCD (which makes for a less flush wall install).
OTOH, if it's just one person planted in a chair right in the sweet spot, then LCD becomes a more competitive option.
We have both plasma and LCD here. And when it's movie time, one is the clear favorite.
this Tv will be in our family room that is approx 14ft wide by 20 foot long, the tv will be mounted on the 14ft wide wall and all viewing angles are what id call "sweet spot seats" with the tv mounted at around 5 ft up on the wall (5 foot centered) everyone in the room will have a perfect view.. so take angle out of the consideration..
Plasma is still superior. They have fixed the issues with plasma over the years. Burn in is pretty much a non issue, they no longer put out much more heat than an lcd and the estimated energy cost to operate my 60" panasonic plasma was $22 a year.
Plasmas have superior black levels (this is the most important aspect), richer truer colors, zero lag. I returned a new 60" sharp aquos 240hz TV around this past thanksgiving. Paid over $1900 for it and the black levels were sub par and it had light blotches on a dark screen. The motion blur just about made me sick to my stomach. A passed football looked like 1 football with 4 ghostly faded looking footballs behind it. 240hz LCD's are NOT really 240hz. They just stick extra images in between each frame. That is NOT true 240hz. Took it back and did some research and found that the newer plasmas are far superior. Bought the panasonic for $1300 and it absolutely blows away the more costly 240hz Aquos. Plasmas produce a much more realistic image than an LCD. Now if you are the type that likes that super bright unrealistic super bright poping out of the screen image than an lcd might be for you. But for anybody like likes a rich realistic image plasma wins hands down.
